Cognition and Development

• Piaget's theory of cognitive development 


  Describes the development of all mental processes in particular thinking, reasoning and our understanding of the world. Continues throughout the lifespan but psychologists have been particularly concerned with how thinking, reasoning develops through childhood.
• The motivation to learn- disequilibrium and equilibrium

  • According to Piaget, we are motivated to learn when our existing schemas do not allow us to make sense of something new
  • Leads to unpleasant sensation of disequilibrium, to escape disequilibrium we have adapt to new situationby exploring and learning what we need to know- we achieve equilibration by doing this, the preferred mental state.
• How learning takes place- Assimilation and accommodation


  Piaget saw that the process of learning is adapted to new situations so that we can understand it.

  Assimilation- when we understand a new experience and equilibrate by adding new info to our existing schemas. E.g. child with dogs can adapt to the existence of different dog breeds by assimilating them into dog schema.

  Accommodation- child has to adjust to these by either radically changing current schemas or forming new ones. Involve altering the animal/pet schemas to include cats and forming new cat-schema
• One strength - children form individual mental representations by discovery

  Piaget suggests that even children who have similar learning experiences will form quite individual mental representations.

  This hypothesis has been tested in a series of studies by Howe.

  One study 1992- put children 9-12 in groups of four to study and discuss movement of objects down a slope. Supports Piaget's idea that kids learn by forming there own personal mental representations
• Another strength - Applications in education

  His idea of kids forming own mental representation of world has revolutionised classroom teaching.

  Instead of kids sat in rows copying from board, replaced by activity- oriented classrooms- kids actively engage in tasks that allow them to construct their own understandings of the curriculum

  Learning by discovery can take different forms, in early years classroom kids may e.g. investigate the physical properties of sand and water.

  A level students can read on topic before lesson so lesson time can be focused on higher level evaluation skills.
• One limitation- Piaget may have underplayed the role of other people in learning


  He didnt believe kids learn best on their own, saw adults, peers as important sources of info during discovery learning.

  But other people were not in the main focus of his theory and he saw learning in terms of what happens in the mind of individual.

  But other theories of learning, cog development suggest other people are absolutely central to the processes of learning.

  Vygotsky proposed learning is essentially a social process and that kids are capable of more advanced learning if supported by expert adults.
• Vygotsky's theory of cognitive development


  Both him and piaget agreed that kids reasoning abilities develop in particular sequence and that such abilities qualitatively different at different ages, with child typically capable of particular logic at particular stages.

  Major difference- Vygotsky saw CD as social process of learning from more experienced others, knowledge is first intermental between the more and less expert individual than intramental within the mind of the less expert individiual.

  Vygotksy also saw language as much more important part of CD than did Piaget
• Culture differences in cognitive abilities

  If reasoning abilities are acquired from more experienced individuals with whom a child has contact, it follows that the child will acquire the reasoning abilities of those particular people.
• The zone of proximal development (ZPD)


  Vygotsky put emphasis on the role of learning through interaction with others, identified gap between the child's current level of development

  ZPD- The gap of what they can understand and do alone and what they can potentially understand after interaction with more experts.

  Expert assistance allows chidl to cross the ZPD and understand as much of subject /situation as they are capable - kids are still to some extent limited by their developmental stage

  Vygotsky believed that kids develop a more advanced understanding of situation.
• ZPD (2)

  The more advanced reasoning abilities needed to deal with it by learning from others, as opposed to through individual exploration of the world

  Critically Vygotsky wasn't just saying that kids can learn more facts during social interaction, but also that they acquire more advanced reasoning abilities

  He believed that the higher mental functions, such as formal reasoning could only be acquired via interaction and with more advanced others
• Scaffolding

  The next logical step in understanding the ZPD.

  This refers to all kinds of help adults and more advanced peers give a child to help them cross the ZPD.

  David Wood, Bruner, Ross 1976- identified 5 aspects to scaffolding which are general ways in which an adult can help a child better understand and perform a task:
• Wood's theory


  Noted that particular strategies that experts use when scaffolding.

  In general, as a learner crosses the ZPD, the level of help given in scaffolding declines from level 5 most help to level 1 least help.

  Adult is more likely to use high level of help strategies when first helping, then to gradually withdraw the level of help as a child grasps the task.

  Example- helping child draw. Level 1- mother says 'now draw something else. Level 5- mother draws object with crayons
• One strength of Vygotsky's theory

  Evidence show there's indeed a gap between level of reasoning a child can achieve on their own, what they can achieve with help from more expert. E.g. Bryant study 1998.

  He gave 4-5 old kids the task of estimating the number of sweets in a box. One condition- kids worked alone, in another they worked with the help of an older child. Most kids working alone failed to give a good estimate. Most 4-5 receiving this kind of help mastered the task.

  Supports Vygotsky's idea that kids can develop additional reasoning abilities when working with more expert.
• Another strength of Vygotsky's theory

  Has been observed in many studies i.e. Byrant study, that adults and older kids provide support for younger kids learning to master new tasks.

  This doesn't tell us anything about what happens during that support though. Better evidence for the idea of scaffolding comes from the research showing that the level of help given by expert partner declines during process of learning.

  Conner and Cross 2003- In solving tasks with help of mothers, 45 kids, observing them engaged in solving tasks with help of mother 16,26,44,54 months.
• Another strength of Vygotsky theory- (2)

  Distinctive changes in help were observed over time, mothers used less and less direct intervention and more hints and prompts as kids gained experience.

  They also increasingly offered help when it was needed rather constantly.
• Final strength of Vygotsky's theory

  Applications in education- idea that kids can learn more and faster with appropriate scaffolding has raised expectations of what they shoudl be able to achieve.

  Social interaction in learning through group work, peer tutoring, individual adult assistance from teachers and teaching assistants has been used to scaffold kids through their ZPD.

  Evidence suggest these strategies are effective- Van Keer 2005- found 7 year old tutored by 10 year old in addition, progressed further in reading than controls who just had standard whole class-teaching.
• One limitation of Vygotsky's theory

  Role of individual differences- Like Piaget, Vygotksy assumed that the process of learning are largely the same in all children. This doesn't take into account of individual differences.

  Some children learn best during social interaction but may not be true for everyone.

  Personality and style of info processing may have powerful effects on what sort of activities and what sort of help works for different children
• Baillargeon's explanation of infant abilities- Early research on knowledge of the physical world.


  Piaget believed babies less than 8-9 months have a very primitive understanding of the nature of physical world. E.g. he claimed they aren't aware that objects continue to exist after they leave the visual field.

  Piaget's reasoning was based on his research showing that from this age babies would reach for object removed from their view but would immediately lose interest once object was out of sight.
• Early research on knowledge of physical world (2)

  But some psychologists were critical of Piaget's research in this area, it's possible e.g. young babies don't pursue a hidden object simply because they don't have the motor skills.

  Alternatively, they my lose interest because their abilities of selective attention are not well enough developed to stop themselves becoming distracted.

  Baillargeon working in 1980's pointed out that alternative research methods have suggested younger babies my have a better-developed understanding of physical world than was previously thought.
• Violation of expectation

  She developed this method to investigate infant understanding of physical world.

  Baillargeon 2004- 'in typical experiment, infants see two test events: an expected event, which is consistent with the expectation examined in the experiment and an unexpected event, which violates this expectation.

  So if the VOE is used to test object permanence , infants will typically see 2/more conditions in which objects pass in and out of sight.

  In control condition- object behaves as a person with object permanence would expect.
• Procedure and findings of VOE

  Procedure- Graber, Baillargeon 1987- showed 24 infants 5-6 months, a tall, short rabbit pass behind a screen with a window.

  Possible condition the tall rabbit can be seen passing the window but short one cannot. Impossible condition neither rabbit appeared in window.

  Findings- infants looked for average 33.07 seconds at the impossible, 25.11 seconds- possible.

  Researchers interpreted infants were surprised at impossible cond. For them to surprised- must have known that rabbit should reappear in window.

  Demonstrates an understanding of object permanence.
• Other studies

  The previous study was an occlusion study when object occludes another i.e. it's in front of it.

  VOE experiments also have been used to test infant understanding of containment and support.

  Containment-idea that when an object is seen to enter a container it should still be there when the container is opened.

  Support- an object should fall when unsupported but not when it's on a horizontal surface.

  In all these cases, infants have shown they pay more attention to 'impossible events', so appear to have an understanding of physical word- (2008)
• Baillargeon's theory of infant physical reasoning


  2012- she proposed that humans born with physical reasoning system, we are born hard-wired with both basic understanding of physical world and ability to learn more details easily.

  One aspect of the world of which we have a crude understanding from birth is object persistence, thoroughly the same idea as Piaget's object permanence; the idea than an object remains in existence and doesn't spontaneously alter in structure.
• Baillargeon theory of infant physical reasoning (2)


  First few weeks, infants begin to identify event categories, each event category corresponds to one way in which objects interact.

  E.g. occlusion events take place when one object blocks the view of another.

  Because a child is born with a basic understanding of object persistence an quickly learns that one object can block their view of another,by the time they are tested in tasks like Graber's VOE with tall, short rabbits, children actually have good understanding that the tall rabbit should appear at the window.
• Baillargeon's theory of infant physical reasoning (2)

  The 'impossible' events captures infants' attention because the nature of their PRS means they're predisposed to attend to new events that might allow them to develop their understanding of the physical world.
• Evaluation - One strength

  There were always problems with Piaget's methods for studying kids knowledge of physical world.

  He assumed when baby shifted attention away from an out-of-sight object this meant that child no longer knew it existed.

  However,child might have shifted attention simply because they lost interest, VOE method is probably a better method for investigating whether a child has some understanding of permanent nature of objects, it eliminates this confounding variable.

  Means VOE method has better validity than some alternatives.
• Another strength

  Hespos 2012- point out without learning and regardless of experience we all have a very good understanding of the basic properties of physical objects. They give example of dangling keys.

  If we all let go of key ring it will fall to floor, according to Hespos this understanding requires PRS.

  Fact this understanding is universal strongly suggests this system is innate- otherwise we would expect cultural differences for which there is a lack of evidence.

  This is a strength of Baillargeon's idea of the PRS because its universal nature suggests it's innate as she believed.
• One limitation

  • His research is the assumption response to VOE is linked to unexpectedness and hence object permanence. Piaget-babies respond to unexpected events, doesn't mean they understand it.
  • All VOE shows babies find certain events interesting. We're inferring link between this response and object permanence. The different length of time spent looking at 2 different events may reflect one being more interesting than other, may not be cause baby sees it unexpected - interesting for other reason
  • Means VOE method- not be valid way to study a kid's understanding of the physical world.
• Social cognition- Selman's levels of perspective-taking


  Selman proposed that the development of social perspective-taking is a separate process, a domain specific approach to explaining cog dev. He looked at changes that occurred with age in children's responses to scenarios where they were asked to role as different people in a social situation
• Procedure and findings


  30 boys and 30 girls. All given task to measure perspective-taking ability. Involved asking them how each person felt in various scenarios. One involved girl who promised father not to climb trees but then comes across friend whose cat is stuck up the tree. Task was to explain how each person father, holly, friend would feel if she climbed/not climbed up the tree.

  Findings- number of distinct levels of perspective-taking were identified. Selman found level of perspective-taking were identified and found that level of perspective-taking correlated with age.
• Selman's stages of development

  • Stage 0 (3-6 years)- Egocentric, child can't reliably distinguish between their own emotions and of others. They can generally identify emotional states in other but don't understand what social behaviour might have caused them.
  • Stage 1 (6-8) Social-informational- child can now tell difference between their point of view and others but they can usually focus on only one of these perspectives.
  • Stage 2(8-10) self-reflective, child can put themselves in the position of others and fully appreciate their perspective but can only take board one view at a time.
• Selman's stages of development (2)

  • Stage 3 (10-12) mutual- children are now able to look at situation from their own and another's perspective at the same time.
  • Stage 4 (12+) social and conventional system- young people become able to see sometimes understanding others' viewpoints isn't enough to allow people to reach agreement which is why social conventions needed to keep order.
  • Selman believed the development via these stages is based on maturity and experience
• Later developments of his theory

  • 3 Aspects as previous descriptions of Cog reasoning don't fully explain social development
  • Interpersonal understanding- what he measured in his earlier perspective- taking research. If we can take different roles then we can understand social situations.
  • Interpersonal negotiation strategies- we have to develop skills in how to respond to social situations, so we develop social skills e.g. managing conflict
  • Awareness of personal meaning of relationships- social development requires ability to reflect social behaviour in context of different relationships.
• One strength

  • Evidence perspective-taking becomes more advanced with age. Selman 1971- tested 60 children using scenarios (holly and kitten). Found significant positive correlations between age and ability to take different perspectives . This cross-sectional research has been supported by the findings of longitudinal studies. These studies have followed children over period of time, recorded improvements in perspective-taking ability.
  • Longitudinal studies have good validity as they control for individual differences. Means there's solid support from different research for his basic idea
• Another strength

  • Support for importance perspective-taking in social development and this is supported by an observational study of child-parent interaction in toyshops. 2008- interactions were observed and researchers noted any coercive behaviour in the children i.e. trying to force parents to buy things- example of unhealthy social behaviour. Study found negative correlations between coercive behaviour and both age and perspective-taking ability - assessed by interview
  • Suggests there's relationship between perspective-taking abilities and healthy social behaviour
• One limitation

  • His stages is the focus on cog factors alone. Perspective taking ability is a cog ability. But there's far more to child's development than their increasing cog abilities. by focusing on cog element of development. His account fails to take account he full range of other factors that impact on child's social development. Other internal factors include development of empathy and emotional self-regulation.
  • There are also important external factors- parenting style, opportunities to learn.
  • Means his approach to explaining social dev is too narrow
• Social cognition- Theory of mind

  - About our personal understanding of what other people are thinking and feeling.

  Intentional reasoning in toddlers- Andrew 1988 provided evidence to show toddler have an understanding of adult intentions when carrying out simple actions. Children (18 months) observed adults place beads into jar. In experimental conditions- adults appear to struggle with this, some beads fell outside jar. In control - adults placed beads successfully in jar.

  This suggests they were imitating what adult intended to do not what adults actually did- shows they have simple ToM
• False belief tasks

  • developed to test whether children can understand that people can believe something that's not true- Wimmer 1983. They told 3–4-year-olds story in which Maxi left his chocolate in blue cupboard in kitchen and went to playground. Later his mother used some of the chocolate in her cooking and placed remainder in green cupboard. Childre asked where Maxi would look for chocolate after playground.
  • Most 3 year old said green cupboard assuming Maxi knows what they know. However most 4 year olds correctly said blue cupboard.
  • Suggests ToM undergoes a shift, more advanced at 4
• Sally-Anne task

  • Sally puts marble in basket and when she left Ann moves marble to her box.
  • Baron-Cohen explored links between ASD and ToM deficits using these tasks.
  • Procedure 1985- 20 children diagnosed with ASD, control group of 27 kids without diagnosis, 14 -down syndrome were each given Sally-Anne task
  • Findings- 85% of kids in control correctly identified where Sally would look for marble but only 20% able to answer this. This dramatic difference shows ASD involves ToM deficit.
  • Baron, colleagues suggested deficits in ToM may be complete explanation for ASD
• One strength of social cognition

  • ToM research has application to understanding ASD. The tests used to assess ToM e.g. false belief task are difficult for people with ASD as individuals may find it hard to understand what other people thinking. In turn offers an explanation why people with ASD often find social interaction difficult. Being able to pick up on another person's thoughts and feelings is something neurotypical people do with very little effort
  • Means that ToM research has real-world relevance