PSY100H1 Lecture Notes - Lecture 7: Syllogism, Motor Action F.C., Object Permanence

6 views6 pages
Published on 26 Jan 2013
of 6
Developmental Psychology -
Lecture 7
(Oct 28/09)
Neo–Piagetian Research
Left a complex theory that has generated an enormous amount of research
on cognitive development
Research on sensory motor stage
oDetailed sequence of children’s abilities
o2 abilities children gain
1)object permanence
Prior to this stage, if kids couldn’t see it, they didn’t know it was
there. Don’t acquire this until 12 months of age
Experiment: Habituation Display
Screen would rotate and comes into contact with the box. She
compared with impossible display, the screen rotates 180
degrees and then the box reappears? Impossible cause it
violates principle of solidity. If kids have notion of object
permanence then they would still think the box exists.
A test of object permanence
If they can see impossible display as being impossible, they
would have knowledge of the box even if the screen was
covering it.
THEREFORE 4/5 month old infants show evidence of object
Piaget’s task involved motor tasks where kids were required to
reach out. They probablly new object was there but they
couldn’t produce the movements to prove it? That’s why he
thought object permanence was at 12 months of age.
2nd study
A-Not-B Error”
Infants have motor skills to recover the toy
They hide a toy in A location and the infant recovers it. Then they
hide it in the B location in front of the child. What happens is that
infant still searches for it in A location
Infant thinks that object only exists in that particular location so
they haven’t developed object permanence.
Maybe infants are failing this task not because of a problem with
conceptualizing this object but maybe the kid just has a bad
memory. So maybe its not object permanence. So how do we
test this?
Did an alternate study
B location is all the way at the other end.
They make a prediction.
If an infant does not remember where object is then they will
search either B or one of the cups near B (at a diff location)
What they found is that infants are to search in cups near B
location. So infants just have bad memories, not an issue of
object permanence.
Clearly there’s evidence that infants have some knowledge of
object permanence earlier than Piaget has originally thought.
Piaget’s notion of Imitation
oPiaget thought that infants don’t show imitation until .......
oPiaget set up complex imitation sequences. Infants could show imitation
much earlier in life if the gestures were simple. Instead of using complex
behaviour, and use things that babies can easily do like facial movements
since they’re not good at motor movements. 1 classic study(1994), infants
were shown different facial expressions (Sticking tongue out)
oBabies have imitative abilities as long as it’s natural
oThat was Piaget’s problem, he didn’t use behaviours that were natural for
the babies
oInfants 6 week olds will show this kind of imitation behaviour
oSo both imitation and object permanence are there earlier than Piaget
Piaget’s notion of ego-centrism (pre-operational period)
oChildren can only view the world from their own point of view ego-
oHow did Piaget test this.
oPic of dog on one side and cat on the other side and showed it to a 3 yr
old. Ask kid wat he sees and ask what experimenter sees. Kid should
assume that experimenter will see what kid sees. But the kid knows that
the experimenter has a diff view of the card than 3 yr old does. He knows
that experimenter can see a cat so therefore this shows that children are
not ego-centric.
Idea of conservation
oConservation of volume
oOnce you train the child to acknowledge this, child in pre-operational
period tends to generalize this to other topics. They generalize it to a
totally unknown situation. (Water to Clay)
oConcrete operations
Certain skills have to occur before other skills
They have conserve height before they conserve area
Formal operational
oSome children will achieve logical thinking skills than piaget had
previously thought. Children can handle logical thinking if you present it to
them in a logical way
o8 yr olds can reason and tell you if a scenario is logical or not syllogism
type questions. They can figure out “if then” statements that are positive