Piaget Revisited
I. Is dev’t parallel across areas?
Does dev’t proceed at the same rate
across all cognitive areas?
Test:
-- give battery of Piagetian tasks
to children 5
- 10yrs
-- see if two distinct groups:
* pre
- op: fail
e.g., transition between pre
- opand
concrete
- op stages
Results:
* concrete
- op: succeed
II. Is dev’t discontinuous within each
area?
No!!!
Children appear to develop at different rates
in different areas
Results:
Does dev’t in each cognitive area involve
a sequence of qualitatively different
structures?
A. Modified Piagetian tasks
1. Number conservation
No!!!
Dev’t is more continuous, more gradual, than
Piaget believed
Markman
- 5yrs
4
Two conditions:
Evidence:
A. Modified Piagetian tasks
B. Novel tasks
-- Standard: Unit labels (e.g., soldiers)
-- Modified: Group labels (e.g., army)
1
Yours
Yours
Mine
Mine
What’s more, your soldiers (army), my soldiers (army),
or are they both the same?
What’s more, your soldiers (army), my soldiers (army),
or are they both the same?
Results:
2. Visual egocentrism: 3
-
-- Standard: do poorly (longer row has more)
Borke
- 4yrs
3
-- Modified: do better
Two conditions:
mountain task
-- Standard: 3
- mountain
More competence than meets the eye!
-- Modified: rich display
(e.g., house, lake and boat,
animals, etc)
Results:
B. Novel tasks
1. Counting
-- Standard: do poorly (egocentric: attribute own
perspective to doll)
Piaget: Meaningless
-- Modified: do better
Gelman: Is it really?
More competence than meets the eye!
3, 4, 5 yrs
2
How do we count?
3 principles:
one
- one
stable
- order
Test:
Ask children to watch puppet count
5, 7, 12, 20 items
Trials:
cardinal
Correct
Incorrect- - violates one of the
principles
Do young children obey these principles?
Example:
Results:
One
- one principle
Trials:
Correct
Incorrect: skip
double
- count
2. Causality
Piaget:
non
- physical causes,
often magical causes
Very good at detecting violations of the three
principles, even with large sets!
Some understanding of number by 3 yrs
Test:
Ask children to explain:
-- everyday transformations
Rosengren: true?
4, 5 yrs
e.g., balloon
paper
-- magical transformations
e.g., rope
scarf
3
Results:
Where do these magical beliefs come from?
-- everyday transf:
Rosengren et al.
3, 4, 5 yrs
At both 4 and 5, natural, physical causes
Child watches show with parent of magician
doing:
-- magical transf:
4: magic!!
5: trick, deception
-- everyday transf.
-- magical transf.
Analyze spontaneous comments of parent!
Results:
-- Everyday transf:
C. Conclusions:
All parents invoke natural processes
- - Magical transf:
5’s parents: trickery
- 4’s parents: magic!!
3
NO longer have a stage view of
cognitive development!!
Young children’s magical talk reflects teachings
of parents and culture
III. New approaches to dev’t
-- Some researchers focus on changes in
information
- processing
e.g., memory
speed of processing
A. Symbolic reasoning
Symbol:
something someone intends to
stand for something else
DeLoache
2.5, 3 yrs
-- O
ther researchers focus on changes in
experience and knowledge****
4
1. Scale
-
model task:
Results:
-- Orientation: show correspondences
between scale model and room
3 yrs: do well
-- Hide small toy in scale MODEL of a room
2.5 yrs: do poorly (can’t find toy!)
-- Ask child to find large toy in same place in
ROOM
2. Picture task:
Show toy’s hiding place in PICTURE of
a room
Why difference between models and pictures?
Two possibilities:
a) DeLoache:
Ask child to find toy in ROOM
generic symbol
Results:
specific symbol
2.5 yrs: do well!!
At 2.5 yrs:
Some experience with pictures but not
models as specific symbols
b) Other possibility:
Understand model- room relation,
but hard to reason about models
(e.g., 3D)
Can’t understand model stands for specific
room
So don’t realize what know about model can
help them with room!
5
Test:
See this? It’s an
enlarging machine! I
can use it to enlarge
Terry the Troll...
Make children believe model IS room
with an enlarging machine!!!!!
Method:
First, introduce machine
I am going to enlarge this
little room…
WOW!
Next:
WOW!
-- Hide small troll in scale model
-- Enlarge the lot
-- Ask child to find troll in room
6
Now watch, I’m going to hide Terry right here…
Results:
Can you find Terry?
Now watch, I’m going to hide Terry right here…
-- Success at 2.5 years!!
-- Also works if hide big troll in room, shrink room,
ask child to find troll in scale model
Can you find Terry?
Conclusions:
-- At2.5 yrs, do well when believe model IS room
-- Model task is hard only when must understand
model stands for room
-- Performance improves as gain more experience
with models as specific symbols
7
B. Conceptual development
1. Individual concepts
Keil
Piaget: concepts change with stages
Interviews with kindergarteners and older
Modern view: concepts change with
knowledge acquisition
Focus on concepts with both:
defining features (essential)
characteristic features (common, not essential)
Example:
Grandmother
defining feature:
has a child who has a child
characteristic features:
has grey hair
wears glasses
loves to bake cookies
Example: Uncle
“Suppose your mommy has all sorts of
brothers, some very old and some very,
very young. One of your mommy’s
brothers is so young he’s only 2 years
old. Could that be an uncle?”
Younger child:
Older child:
E: Could he be an uncle?
C: No…because he’s little and 2 years old.
E: How old does an uncle have to be?
C: About 24 or 25.
E: If he’s 2 years old can he be an uncle?
C: No…but he can be a cousin.
E: Could he be an uncle?
C: Yes…because he’s still my mother’s brother.
E: Can an uncle be any age?
C: Yes.
8
Example: Lunch
“It’s noon and the sun is shining really bright.
You already ate something today, but you are
still hungry, so you decide to eat pancakes with
syrup, orange juice, cereal, and milk. Could
that be lunch?”
Results:
-- For most concepts, shift from characteristic to
defining features
-- Shift occurred at different ages for different
concepts (not tied to stages)
Continued:
E: Who lives on an island?
C: People…yup, people without clothes
on—you can’t.
E: You can’t have clothes on an island?
C: No, but you can watch.
E: Is there an island in Ithaca?
C: No, cause it’s not summertime yet.
Younger child:
E: Could that be lunch?
C: No…because lunch you have to eat
sandwiches and stuff like that.
E: Can you have cereal for lunch?
C: No.
E: Can you have pancakes for lunch?
C: No.
E: How do you know if something is lunch?
C: You have to eat sandwiches
E: Can you have anything else?
C: You can have drinks, but not breakfast.
E: What is an island?
C: You dance.
E: So whenever you put on a song and
dance, that is an island?
C: Uhuh…people watch.
E: What does an island look like?
C: It looks like a jungle…but not Indians live
in islands. Indians live in jungles.
…
2. Embedded concepts
-- Many of our concepts are interrelated
-- Embedded in causal frameworks, naïve “theories”
e.g., freedom, democracy
animal, alive
9
Carey
4, 7, 10 yrs
interviews
concept “animal”
-- asked about many objects:
*some animals (e.g., people, dogs, worms)
*some not (e.g., car, garlic press, harvester)
-- asked about many properties:
*some animal (e.g., eats, has babies, has bones)
*some not (e.g., has wheels, made in a factory)
Results:
-- By4 yrs, have concept “animal”: attribute
animal properties ONLY to people and other
animals. So distinguish between animals and
other objects
-- But different concept than in older children
10 yrs:
Concept of animal embedded in BIOLOGICAL
naïve “theory”
Understand eating, eliminating, having babies, ….
as biological processes
Colette (age 4):
4 yrs:
More BEHAVIORAL concept
Focus on parts and behaviors
Continuum from people (have all) to
worms (have few)
Do worms eat?
Do worms poop?
Do slugs eat?
Do slugs poop?
Do fish eat?
Do fish poop?
Yes
No
No
Yes
No
No
10
Colette (age 4):
Do cats have babies?
Worms?
Giraffes?
Bugs?
Fish?
At 4 yrs:
Yes
No
Yes
No
No
Little understanding of eating, eliminating,
having babies, …. as biological processes
Conclusions:
Conclusions (cont’d):
-- Important conceptual change
-- Disagreements as to when transition occurs
-- Reorganization of knowledge: biological “theory”
Carey: after age 4
Others: earlier
-- Implications:
-- Effects of experience
concepts of death
life
gender
…
-- Underscores “child as scientist”
11