cognitive development

• piaget's theory of cog dev

  children think in an entirely different way from adults and this manner of information processing affects their cog dev instead of children knowing less than adults.

  bio maturation also contributes to cog dev.
• piaget's theory-schemas

  schemas- mental structures that contain information on a specific aspect of the world which helps us interact with the world around us.

  schemas can be behavioural e.g schema to cross the road or cognitive(multiply numbers mentally).

  as a child progresses through life their interaction with environment leads to schemas developing further(discovery learning).
• piaget's theory-disequilibirum and equilibration

  a driving force behind modification/development of schemas is the motivation to learn caused by situations that we do not understand well.

  the motivation to learn arises when existing schemas do not allow us to make sense of something new(cognitive conflict)- leads to unpleasant feeling(disequilibrium)

  to return to equilibrium the schemas need to be changed to make sense of new info- occurs via assimilation/ accomodation to achieve equilibration and enter preferred state of equilibrium- facilitates cog dev.
• piaget's theory- assimilation and accommodation


  equilibration is achieved in 2 ways

  assimilation- change schemas by adding new info to existing schemas to understand a new experience e.g. when a child sees a parrot for the first time they add to existing schema of birds.

  accommodation-change schemas as response to dramatically new experiences- requiring formation of new schemas to make sense of the situation e.g a child who has never seen a monkey sees one for the first time will create a new schema for it

  takes place throughout life as we come across new experiences.
• P's theory-supporting evidence for experiences improving schemas

  Howe et al put children aged between 9-12 in groups of 4 to study and discuss movement of objects down a slope. Their understanding was assessed before and after the discussion. It was found that after a discussion they had increased their level of knowledge and understanding even though all did not arrive at same conclusion about movement of objects(shows individual understanding)they all improved their understanding-children do in fact learn from experiences which allows them to dev more sophisticated schemas- increases V.
• P's theory- discovery learning has practical apps in education

  instead of rote learning which was prominent form of learning decades ago,today children engage in experiences which leads to discovery learning.

  In primary schools- when children learn about colour theory instead of rote learning- practicallly explore how different colours are created via mixing.

  in secondary schools- children learn about states of matter by practically experimenting with ice cubes and heat

  P's theory is not purely theoretical but can improve student's lives as it improves quality of education. increase utility.
• P's theory- concepts like equilibration are hard to objectively measure and demonstrate under controlled conditions.

  Bryant- it is unclear regarding the level of cognitive conflict that a schema has to go through to reach a state of disequilibrium as it's not measurable.

  some researchers argue that concepts like assimilation/accommodation are not testable and difficult to operationalise and study e.g we cannot tell if someone if someone has gone through assimilation/accomodation

  as piagetian concepts in his theory are unscientific and so less valid it decreases V of theory itself.
• Piaget's stages of cog dev

  as a child matures and goes through a range of experiences their schemas develop further. this allows the child to go through stages of cog dev.

  There are 4 key stages of cog dev that children go through according to Piaget.
• Piaget's stages- Sensorimotor stage

  0-2 years

  infants explore world through physical sensation and developing basic physical coordination

  mainly learn from trial and error e.g learn they can deliberately move their body in particular ways - eventually learn they can move other objects.

  They have a lack of object permanence(cognitive limitation)- lack the ability to know that even though something can no longer be seen it still exists.

  around 8 months- gain object permanence.
• piaget's stages- pre-operational stage


  2-7 yrs

  some rudimentary logic but can't be used to understand how the world exists-leads to reasoning errors. e.g animism- belief that inanimate objects have feelings

  lack conservation - ability to know that even though outward appearance of something changes, its characteristics remain the same.

  possess egocentrism - the inability to see from perspective of others.

  Unable to do class inclusion -can place objects into categories but can't understand that categories have further subsets and objects can belong to more than 1 category at the same time.
• piaget's stages- concrete operational stage


  7-11 years

  by the age of 7- able to show conservation and class inclusion and no longer show egocentrism

  able to use 'operation' which involve better reasoning abilities

  however it is only applied to visible and physical objects/scenarios

  however they lack abstract thinking e.g difficulty understanding concepts like morality.
• piaget's stages- formal operational stage


  11+ years

  by 11 yrs they develop more formal reasoning ability= means that children able to focus and comprehend abstract concepts e.g morality.

  gain the ability to use hypothetico-deductive reasoning e.g test hypothesis in order to determine a causal relationship

  e.g test whether water makes things wet by throwing an object into a pool to establish a causal relationship between water and wetness.
• Piaget's stage's - 3 mountains experiment - egocentrism


  He asked children to view a model of 3 mountains from different angles and asked them to pick the view that a doll would see. Children in this stage were unable to see the perspective of the doll and how the doll might have viewed the 3 mountains and ended up always picking their own view
• P's stages-support for assertion that children in pre-op stage can't conserve


  Piaget performed conservation task with children in pre-op stage. 2 equally spaced rows of counters were laid out in front of the children and they agreed that both had same number. 1 of the lines was spread apart in front of children and then the children stated that the spread-out line had more counters. shows theory is correct that in pre-op stage you can't conserve as children in the study thought the quantity of the row changed as the appearance of the row changes. in line with theory, increases V of theory.
• P's stages -researchers claim that his supporting R for theory-too complicated for 2-3 yr olds to understand well

  Donaldson- children in pre-op stage can conserve if asked in a engaging way so understand better.

  McGarrigle + Donaldson- repeated P's study - found children agreed 2 rows had same number of counters. used puppet to act a 'naughty teddy' spreading out 1 row. Children able to conserve - said both rows had same number. P underestimate cog abilities of children in this stage - stating they can't conserve when they can if task is engaging can understand it

  contradicts P-decreases V
• P's stages- evidence supporting assertion that children in formal op stage can use HD reasoning


  Piaget + Inhelder asked children to work out how to make yellow coloured liquid using different coloured liquids in beakers. Children in pre-op stage tried random combinations whereas children from formal op stage applied logical strategies and reasoning to come to a method of making yellow liquid. shows children in later stages of cog dev are able to in fact use hypothetico-deductive reasoning whereas younger years rely on rudimentary combinations to achieve their goal. increase V
• P's stages - his concept of readiness - PA in education system


  readiness- children aren't biologically ready to be taught certain concepts until they reach certain age e.g difficult to teach 4 yr old abstract maths as not matured enough yet.

  For real learning to occur- activities need to be adjusted to right level+ age. If not right age but taught beyond their ability= superficial learning but not true understanding.

  Knowledge of readiness led to Plowden report = major changes to UK education system

  not purely theoretical - can improve students' learning due to better teaching. increase U.
• Vygotsky's theory of cog dev

  aka social interactionist theory

  the theory argues that the culture someone is raised in and the variety of social experiences they go through facilitates cog dev.

  Child internalises any understanding provided by 'experts' around them e.g family and teachers. This understanding facilitates cog dev.
• V's theory- role of culture and language

  social interaction with people from our culture allows us to see their problem solving skills and internalise it e.g language and how to reason- help us understand the world better and shapes cog dev based on nature of these skills. these acquired skills go on to play a critical role in cog dev. Language that we learn allows us to shift from only being able to do basic mental functions to execute higher level functions. At first, language allows for external monologue(child speaks aloud thoughts) eventually leads to internalised thought.
• V's theory- zone of proximal development


  V argues that learning takes place between what a child currently understands by themselves and what a child can understand with an expert's help - this gap is known as ZPD. This gap is crosses through receiving expert assistance + scaffolding thus achieve a higher level of understanding

  higher mental functions e.g formal reasoning can only be acquired through interacting with experts
• V's theory - scaffolding

  scaffolding- any support framework an expert provides to a child to enable them to cross the ZPD e.g highlight the most critical features of task clearly for child or demonstrate for the child how to perform the task.

  V argues scaffolding allows child to learn but it should be gradually withdrawn to help child perform independently and facilitate cog dev.
• V's theory 5 aspects of scaffoloding

  Bruner,Wood and Ross furthered V's work by identifying 5 aspects of scaffolding that help a child to understand expert knowledge

  1. get a child to focus on the task to start solving it
  2. engage and retain a child's attention on the task
  3. encourage the child to maintain effort and focus
  4. highlight the most critical features of task clearly for child
  5. demonstrate for the child how to perform the task.
• V's theory- supporting evidence for role of culture

  Gredler - culture does have an effect on cog dev. She found that people in Papua New Guinea had a primitive counting system where people could only count up to 29. The participants had real difficulties adding large numbers beyond 29 showing how culture can restrict cog dev. shows that V is correct in asserting culture heavily influences the level of cog dev people experience

  increase V.
• V's theory- concepts like scaffolding and role of experts within learning has practical apps

  teachers can implement peer tutoring programmes e.g reading buddies which involves pairing an older student(an expert) with a younger student to help reading and literacy skills which will enable cog dev.

  Van Keer et al- 7 yr olds who were tutored by 10 yr olds progressed further in reading than 7 year olds taught in standard class setting.

  shows theory isn't purely theoretical- improve student's lives by helping them access cog dev. evidence adds V to role of experts in learning. Increase U + V.
• V's theory-support for role of experts and scaffolding in facilitating cog dev.

  Roazzi and Bryant had 4-5 year old children estimate number of sweets in box. Children worked alone in 1 condition and in another condition worked with help of older child. Most children failed to give good estimate when working alone. But most 4-5 yr olds were successful at task when helped by older child(expert)-provided prompts to point them in right direction to make accurate estimate.

  V is correct that experts in social environment and scaffolding facilitates CD through gaining reasoning skills

  increase V.
• V's theory-can be considered an incomplete explanation of cog dev.

  V is overly focused on role of others in facilitating cog dev and therefore ignores the role of IMP like assimilation in facilitating cog dev.

  E.g V simply argues that cog skills like reasoning are gained by internalising the understanding of others but he doesn't explain the actual mechanisms through which information is internalised

  whereas P claims that cog dev occurs via processes like accommodation and assimilation. As V doesn't account for these mechanisms, his theory is incomplete. decrease V.
• B's explanation of early infant abilities

  Baillargeon is critical of P's research on cog dev between 0-2 yrs old. She thinks that is is possible that younger babies do not pursue a hidden object simply because they lack the specific motor abilities that allow them to do this or they may lose interest in the hidden object because their selective attention is not developed enough to stop themselves from becoming distracted(instead of thinking it has stopped existing). To investigate infant understanding of the physical world, B developed the violation of expectation research.
• B's explanation- Violation of expectation research

  VoE experiment- infants see 2 events- expected event(in line with infant's expectations) and unexpected event (violates expectation)

  in 1 experiment the expected event condition consisted of a tall object being visible as it passed behind a screen with a window and the unexpected event condition involved the tall object not appearing when it passed behind a screen with a window.
• B's explanation- Violation of expectation research results

  results

  infants on average stared at the unexpected event for 33.07 secs whereas in expected event it was an average of 25.11 secs

  as infant stared longer in unexpected shows they must know that tall object continues to exist even behind the obstacle as they assumed it would appear in the window showing they have some understanding of object permanence.
• extra VoE research

  infants shown a cover with a protuberance suggesting a hidden object under the cover. Infants aged 9.5 month showed surprise when the cover was removed and there was nothing under it but didn't show surprise when the object revealed was much smaller than the protuberance suggested. shows that infants initially have a very basic understanding of the physical world. However 12.5 month olds showed surprise when there was a mismatch in the protuberance and the object. shows that this understanding becomes more refined and sophisticated with age.
• B's theory based on VOE research-physical reasoning system

  infants born with PRS- basic hardwired understanding of physical world- this gives head start to understand other details. initially have rudimentary understanding of physical properties of world- becomes refined + sophisticated with experience.

  1 understanding PRS provides: object permanence- innate ability to know objects exist despite not being seen

  function- allows for unexpected events to capture infant's attention= makes us hardwired to pay attention to new events. helps develop new knowledge about physical world and so cog dev.
• B's research- higher validity compared to other cog dev e.g piaget's

  used less biased sample by using birth announcements in local newspaper as ppt pool to pick from compared to P who researched own children

  EVs e.g communication with parents as children sat in parent's lap during task was controlled by asking parents to keep eyes shut and not communicate with children.

  double- blind design - observers who measured infant reaction didnt know whether a expected/unexpected event was shown to infant.

  high level of control B had allowed to eliminate EVs. increases confindence in V of research.
• B's research- criticised for measuring VOE through infant's stare.


  critics- hard to judge what infant is thinking by only measuring duration of gaze.

  assumes infants staring longer at object means their expectations have been violated - in reality may not be true.

  although infants look for different lengths of time at different events - doesn't indicate they see events as expected/unexpected- may be other reasons for why they stare- find colour more interesting in 'unexpected' event.

  B assuming staring=recognition of unexpected event could be false conclusion. decrease V of understanding.
• B's research- may have made inadequate conclusions about OP.

  Bremner believes P may have been right about OP rather than B. P's theory of cog dev- child should not just react to environmental changes but understand those changes + principles behind them to demonstrate cog dev. B's research- children react to situations and be surprised by it before 8 months but doesn't prove they understand why it's unexpected so proves that they may not have OP. OP may come with bio maturation so P's idea of OP is accurate. suggest B overestimates cog abilities of infants - decreases V of research.
• B's research- arguments for innate nature of cog abilities and its refinement over time- in line with field's general consensus 


  while it's difficult to directly test idea of innate PRS the concept itself is consistent with other findings within research into cog abilities.

  Pei et al- infants use crude patterns to judge distance at an early age-these help them develop more refined understanding of world. e.g using texture to judge depth- innate ability of depth perception refines with time. plausible that innate PRS also refines with time. in line with B's assumptions,increase V of theory.
• social cognition


  any thoughts involved in understanding the mental states of others and engaging in social interactions that guide our decision making
• Selmans- Perspective-taking research

  PT- ability to understand a situation from another persons' viewpoint. to investigate dev of PT, Selman asked children aged 4-6 how they felt in scenarios involving dilemmas.

  One scenario involved a child called Holly(who promised her father not to climb trees), preparing to climb a tree to save a kitten.

  Based on a child's response to why people in the scenario behave the way they do, they were categorised to a particular stage of PT (found to correlate with age).

  dev of PT occurs due to maturity
• Selman's stages of PT - socially egocentric


  Stage 0

  3-6 years

  cannot distinguish between their perspective and that of others.

  Able to identify the emotions of others but are unaware of the social causes behind these emotions

  Their ability to take perspectives is governed by their own perspective.
• S's stages- Social Information role-taking


  Stage 1

  6-8 years

  differentiation- can now tell the difference between their own perspective and that of others.

  understand that the reason behind people having different perspectives is the differences in social experiences

  They can only focus on 1 perspective at a time,typically their own.
• S's stages- self-reflective role-taking


  Stage 2

  8-10 years

  can put themselves in position of another person and fully appreciate their perspective

  can only focus on one external perspective at a time

  can now reflect on how they are perceived by another person