Piaget’s stages of intellectual development AO3

• -Flawed conservation research.

  Piaget's method may have led children to believe that something must have changed or why would the researcher change the appearance and then ask them if it was the same? McGarrigle and Donaldson used a 'naughty teddy' who accidentally rearranged the counters. 72% of children under 7 correctly said the number remained the same. This means that children aged 4-6 could conserve, as long as they were not put off by the way they were questioned.
• -Class inclusion ability is questioned.

  Siegler and Svetina found that, when 5-year-olds received feedback that pointed out subsets, they did develop an understanding of class inclusion. This was contrary to Piaget's belief that class inclusion was not possible until a child had reached the necessary intellectual development at 7 years of age. This again means that Piaget underestimated the cognitive abilities of young children.
• -Assertions about egocentrism aren’t supported. Hughes found that even at 3½ years a child could position a boy doll in a model building with two intersecting walls so that the doll could not be seen by a policeman doll. They could do this 90% of the time. 4-year-olds could do this 90% of the time when there were two police officers to hide from. This again suggests the manner of Piaget's studies and tasks led him to underestimate children's intellectual abilities.
• -+ In all the studies outlined on this page the criticisms relate to the age at which a particular ability appears. The sequence of the stages is not challenged and Hughes evidence shows that there is progression. Therefore the core principles of Piaget's stages remain unchallenged but the methods he used meant the timing of his stages was wrong.
• Domain general and Domain specific

  Piaget believed that cognitive development Is a single process (domain-general). Different abilities develop in tandem, which is the basis for teaching children in age groups. However, the existence of learning difficulties such as autism, in which some abilities develop much faster than others, suggest cognitive development is domain-specific. Therefore it appears that development is best seen as domain-specific, which may have implications for education.