Baillargeon's explanation of infant abilities

• early research on knowledge of the physical world:

  • Baillargeon suggested young babies had a better understanding of the physical world than Piaget thought. Thought the lack of understanding of object permanence could be explained differently e.g. may lack necessary motor skills to pursue a hidden object or may just loose interest.
• Violation of expectation research (VOE)

  • technique developed by Baillargeon to investigate her beliefs about babies' superior abilities.
  • procedure= 24 babies, 5-6 months, are showed a tall and short rabbit passing a screen during the familiarisation event. in the test events there are 2 conditions: 1= expected event where a short rabbit is passed through the screen and not seen out the window due to it's height (or a tall one is seen) and visible once out the other side. 2= unexpected event- tall rabbit wouldn't be seen through the window- a baby with object permanence would show suprise.
• VOE:

  • findings= babies looked for average of 33.07 seconds at unexpected event compared to 25.11 seconds at expected event. Researchers saw this a s the babies being suprised at unexpected condition. demonstrates a good understanding of object permanence.
• VOE

  • other studies= VOE studies have been used to test infant understanding of containment and support. 'containment'= when an object is seen to enter a container it should still be there when opened. 'support'= idea an object should fall when unsupported but not when on a horizontal surface. in all these cases infants have paid more attention to the unexpected events so appear to have a good understanding of the physical world
• baillargeon's theory of infant physical reasoning:

  • proposed infant's are born with an physical reasoning system (PRS)- born hardwired with a basic understanding of the physical world and the ability to learn details easily. initially we are aware of the physical properties of the world but this becomes more sophisticated as we learn from experience. e.g. object persistance= idea an object still exists and remains structured.
• Baillargeon's theory of infant physical reasoning:

  • Development= first few weeks a baby begins to identify event categories, occlusion events take place when one object blocks the other. as babies' are born with basic understanding of object persistence and learn quick that one object can block another, by the time they are tested with methods like VOE they already have a good understanding of what should happen. the unexpected event captures their attention as they are predisposed to believe new events will help develop their understanding.
• Evaluation: strength

  • validity of violation of expectation: The VOE method overcomes a limitation of Piaget’s research, which assumed babies no longer believed in a hidden object when they lost interest. His method couldn’t distinguish between loss of belief and distraction. VOE controls for this by measuring only how long babies look at a scene, increasing validity.
  • Counterpoint: Piaget argued that acting in line with a principle doesn’t mean understanding it (Bremner). Recognising unexpected events doesn’t confirm cognitive change, as response alone may not indicate true comprehension.
• Evaluation: Strength

  Hespos and Marle (2012) argue that everyone shares a strong understanding of basic physical principles, regardless of culture or experience. This suggests that our knowledge of the physical world is innate rather than learned. If it were not innate, we would expect significant cultural and individual differences in understanding, yet no evidence supports this. Their findings support the idea of a predisposed reasoning system (PRS), indicating that humans are born with a fundamental grasp of object properties and interactions.
• Evaluation: Limitation

  Piaget argued that babies’ responses to unexpected events don’t confirm true understanding. A key issue is that VOE only shows babies find certain events more interesting, not necessarily unexpected. The assumption that looking time reflects object permanence may be flawed, as interest could stem from other factors, questioning VOE's validity.