Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development
Outline <ul><li>(1) General introduction. </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Sensory-Motor period. </li></ul><ul><li>(3) Pre-operationa...
I: Terms and concepts.
Genetic Epistemology: A constructivist theory <ul><li>No innate ideas...not a nativist theory. </li></ul><ul><li>Nor is th...
How does Piaget describe developmental change? <ul><li>Development occurs in stages, with a qualitative shift in the organ...
Stages of Cognitive Development <ul><li>(1) Sensorimotor (0-2 years) </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Pre-operational (2-7 years) </l...
What develops? Cognitive structures <ul><li>Cognitive structures are the means by which experience is interpreted and orga...
How do cognitive structures develop? <ul><li>Through assimilation and accomodation. </li></ul><ul><li>Assimilation: The in...
Why accommodate? <ul><li>Normally, the mind is in a state of equilibrium: existing structures are stable, and assimilation...
Active view of development <ul><li>Child as scientist </li></ul><ul><li>Mental structures intrinsically active    constan...
Instructional learning viewed as relatively unimportant <ul><li>Teachers should not try to transmit knowledge, but should ...
II: The Sensorimotor Period  (0-2 years) <ul><li>Only some basic motor reflexes   grasping, sucking, eye movements, orien...
II: The Sensorimotor Period  (0-2 years) <ul><li>Intentionality  refers to the ability to act in a goal-directed manner  ...
II: The Sensorimotor Period  (0-2 years) <ul><li>Object permanence  refers to the understanding that objects continue to e...
Stage 1 (0-1 month) <ul><li>Stage of reflex activity. </li></ul><ul><li>Many  reflexes like reaching, grasping sucking all...
Stage 2 (1-4 months) <ul><li>Stage of Primary Circular Reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Infant’s behaviour, by chance, leads t...
Object concept at stage 2 <ul><li>Passive expectation: if object disappears, infant will continue looking to the location ...
Intentions at stage 2 <ul><li>Intentionality beginning to emerge: infant can now self-initiate certain schemes (e.g., thum...
Stage 3 (4-8 months) <ul><li>Stage of Secondary Circular Reactions </li></ul><ul><li>Repetition of simple actions on exter...
Intentionality at stage 3 <ul><li>Poor understanding of the connection between causes and effect limits their ability to a...
Object concept at stage 3 <ul><li>Visual anticipation. </li></ul><ul><li>If infant drops an object, and it disappears, the...
Stage 4 (8-12 months) <ul><li>Co-ordination of secondary circular reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Secondary schemes combined ...
Intentionality at Stage 4 <ul><li>First appearance of intentional or in Piaget’s terms, means-end behavior. </li></ul><ul>...
Object concept at stage 4 <ul><li>Infant will search for hidden objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Does infant understand the obje...
A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
B trials The A not B task The A not B task
B trials The A not B task The A not B task
B trials The A not B task ??
A not B error <ul><li>Infant continues to search at the first hiding location after object is hidden in the new location. ...
Stage 5 (12-18 months) <ul><li>Stage of Tertiary Circular Reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Actions varied in an experimental f...
Object concept at stage 5. <ul><li>Can solve A not B. </li></ul><ul><li>Cannot solve A not B with invisible displacement (...
Stage 5 and invisible displacement <ul><li>Can only imagine the object as existing where it was last hidden. </li></ul><ul...
Stage 6 (18-24 months) <ul><li>Can solve object search with invisible displacement.  </li></ul><ul><li>Infants now mentall...
Stage 6 (18-24 months) <ul><li>Sensori-motor period culminates with the emergence of the  Symbolic function </li></ul><ul>...
Summary  <ul><li>Sensori-motor period culminates in the emergence of symbolic representation. </li></ul><ul><li>Object per...
Piaget – Part 2 Beyond the sensorimotor period
III: The pre-operational period <ul><li>Symbolic thought without operations. </li></ul><ul><li>Operations: logical princip...
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Conservation of liquid
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
<ul><li>Why do pre-operational children fail problems of conservation? </li></ul><ul><li>Because their thinking is not gov...
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Reversibility: The pouring of water into the small  container can be...
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Compensation: A decrease in the height of the new  container is comp...
Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Identity: No amount of liquid has been added or taken away.
<ul><li>Why do pre-operational children fail problems of conservation? </li></ul><ul><li>Because their thinking is not gov...
Characteristics of Pre-Operational Thinking <ul><li>Not governed by logical operations </li></ul><ul><li>Consequently, it ...
Doll  1 Doll 2 Child 3 Mountains Task
Doll  1 Doll 2 Child 3 Mountains Task
Characteristics of Pre-Operational Thinking <ul><li>(1) Egocentric </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Intuitive    problem solving is ...
Nature of intuitive reasoning <ul><li>No reversibility    Cannot mentally undo a given action. </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptu...
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
Conservation of mass
Conservation of mass
Conservation of mass
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
Emotion reasoning
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s th...
IV: Concrete operational thinking  (7-12 years) <ul><li>Qualitatively different reasoning in conservation problems.  </li>...
IV: Concrete operational thinking  (7-12 years) <ul><li>Physical operations now internalized and have become cognitive </l...
Horizontal decalage <ul><li>Different conservation problems solved at different ages. </li></ul><ul><li>Some claim it is a...
V: Formal operations <ul><li>Thought no longer applied strictly to concrete problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Directed inward: t...
V: Formal operations <ul><li>Deductive thought in period of concrete operations confined to familiar everyday experience: ...
Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Example: Pendulum problem </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific thinking: from specific observations to...
Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Example: Pendulum problem </li></ul>How fast?
Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Formal operational children will systematically test all possibilities before arriving at a co...
VI: Evaluating Piaget <ul><li>Difficult. </li></ul><ul><li>An enormous theory. </li></ul><ul><li>Covers many ages and issu...
Strengths <ul><li>Active rather than passive view of the child. </li></ul><ul><li>Revealed important invariants in cogniti...
Weaknesses <ul><li>The competence-performance distinction </li></ul>
Competence <ul><li>Knowledge, rules, and concepts that form the basis of cognition. </li></ul><ul><li>Inferred from behavi...
Performance <ul><li>Energy level, interest, attention, language skills, motivation etc.  </li></ul><ul><li>Factors that ef...
Competence-performance distinction. <ul><li>Piaget attributed infants success (or lack of success) to competence. </li></u...
Performance-competence distinction and A not B <ul><li>A not B errors thought to indicate poor understanding of objects. <...
Other examples <ul><li>Borke (1975) & the 3 mountains task. </li></ul><ul><li>Bruner (1966) & the liquid conservation task...
Stages? <ul><li>Stage like progression only observed if one assumes a bird-eye view. </li></ul><ul><li>Closer inspection r...
Summary <ul><li>Piaget’s theory is wide-ranging and influential. </li></ul><ul><li>Source of continued controversy. </li><...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Piaget

3,021

Published on

0 Comments
5 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
3,021
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
5
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Piaget

  1. 1. Jean Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development
  2. 2. Outline <ul><li>(1) General introduction. </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Sensory-Motor period. </li></ul><ul><li>(3) Pre-operational period. </li></ul><ul><li>(4) Concrete operations. </li></ul><ul><li>(5) Formal operations. </li></ul><ul><li>(6) Evaluation. </li></ul>
  3. 3. I: Terms and concepts.
  4. 4. Genetic Epistemology: A constructivist theory <ul><li>No innate ideas...not a nativist theory. </li></ul><ul><li>Nor is the child a “tabula rasa” with the “real” world out there waiting to be discovered. </li></ul><ul><li>Instead, mind is constructed through interaction with the environment; what is real depends on how developed one’s knowledge is </li></ul>
  5. 5. How does Piaget describe developmental change? <ul><li>Development occurs in stages, with a qualitative shift in the organization and complexity of cognition at each stage. </li></ul><ul><li>Thus, children not simply slower, or less knowledgeable than adults  instead, they understand the world in a qualitatively different way. </li></ul><ul><li>Stages form an invariant sequence. </li></ul>
  6. 6. Stages of Cognitive Development <ul><li>(1) Sensorimotor (0-2 years) </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Pre-operational (2-7 years) </li></ul><ul><li>(3) Concrete Operational (7-11 years) </li></ul><ul><li>(4) Formal Operational (11-16 years) </li></ul>
  7. 7. What develops? Cognitive structures <ul><li>Cognitive structures are the means by which experience is interpreted and organized: reality very much in the eye of the beholder </li></ul><ul><li>Early on, cognitive structures are quite basic, and consist of reflexes like sucking and grasping. </li></ul><ul><li>Piaget referred to these structures as schemes. </li></ul>
  8. 8. How do cognitive structures develop? <ul><li>Through assimilation and accomodation. </li></ul><ul><li>Assimilation: The incorporation of new experiences into existing structures. </li></ul><ul><li>Accommodation: The changing of an old structures so that new experiences can be processed. </li></ul><ul><li>Assimilation is conservative, while accommodation is progressive. </li></ul>
  9. 9. Why accommodate? <ul><li>Normally, the mind is in a state of equilibrium: existing structures are stable, and assimilation is mostly occurring. </li></ul><ul><li>However, a discrepant experience can lead to disequilibrium or cognitive “instability” </li></ul><ul><li>Child forced to accommodate existing structures. </li></ul>
  10. 10. Active view of development <ul><li>Child as scientist </li></ul><ul><li>Mental structures intrinsically active  constantly being applied to experience </li></ul><ul><li>Leads to curiosity and the desire to know </li></ul><ul><li>Development proceeds as the child actively refines his/her knowledge of the world through many “small experiments” </li></ul>
  11. 11. Instructional learning viewed as relatively unimportant <ul><li>Teachers should not try to transmit knowledge, but should provide opportunities for discovery </li></ul><ul><li>Child needs to construct or reinvent knowledge  adult knowledge cannot be formally communicated to the child </li></ul><ul><li>Limited importance of socio-cultural context; importance of peer interaction. </li></ul>
  12. 12. II: The Sensorimotor Period (0-2 years) <ul><li>Only some basic motor reflexes  grasping, sucking, eye movements, orientation to sound, etc </li></ul><ul><li>By exercising and coordinating these basic reflexes, infant develops intentionality and an understanding of object permanence . </li></ul>
  13. 13. II: The Sensorimotor Period (0-2 years) <ul><li>Intentionality refers to the ability to act in a goal-directed manner  in other words, to do one thing in order that something else occurs. </li></ul><ul><li>Requires an understanding of cause and effect </li></ul>
  14. 14. II: The Sensorimotor Period (0-2 years) <ul><li>Object permanence refers to the understanding that objects continue to exist even when no longer in view. </li></ul><ul><li>Need to distinguish between an action and the thing acted on. </li></ul>
  15. 15. Stage 1 (0-1 month) <ul><li>Stage of reflex activity. </li></ul><ul><li>Many reflexes like reaching, grasping sucking all operating independently. </li></ul><ul><li>Objects like &quot;sensory pictures&quot;. </li></ul><ul><li>Subjectivity and objectivity fused. </li></ul><ul><li>Schemes activated by chance: No intentionality. </li></ul>
  16. 16. Stage 2 (1-4 months) <ul><li>Stage of Primary Circular Reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Infant’s behaviour, by chance, leads to an interesting result & is repeated. </li></ul><ul><li>Circular: repetition. </li></ul><ul><li>Primary: centre on infant's own body. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: thumb-sucking. </li></ul>
  17. 17. Object concept at stage 2 <ul><li>Passive expectation: if object disappears, infant will continue looking to the location where it disappeared, but will not search. </li></ul><ul><li>In the infant mind, the existence of the object still very closely tied to schemes applied to experience </li></ul>
  18. 18. Intentions at stage 2 <ul><li>Intentionality beginning to emerge: infant can now self-initiate certain schemes (e.g., thumb-sucking) </li></ul>
  19. 19. Stage 3 (4-8 months) <ul><li>Stage of Secondary Circular Reactions </li></ul><ul><li>Repetition of simple actions on external objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: bang a toy to make a noise. </li></ul>
  20. 20. Intentionality at stage 3 <ul><li>Poor understanding of the connection between causes and effect limits their ability to act intentionality. </li></ul><ul><li>“ Magical causality”  accidentally banging toy makes many interesting things happen </li></ul>
  21. 21. Object concept at stage 3 <ul><li>Visual anticipation. </li></ul><ul><li>If infant drops an object, and it disappears, the infant will visually search for it. </li></ul><ul><li>Will also search for partially hidden objects </li></ul><ul><li>But will not search for completely hidden objects. </li></ul>
  22. 22. Stage 4 (8-12 months) <ul><li>Co-ordination of secondary circular reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Secondary schemes combined to create new action sequences. </li></ul>
  23. 23. Intentionality at Stage 4 <ul><li>First appearance of intentional or in Piaget’s terms, means-end behavior. </li></ul><ul><li>Infant learns to use one secondary scheme (e.g., pulling a towel) in order that another secondary scheme can be activated (e.g., reaching and grasping a toy) </li></ul>
  24. 24. Object concept at stage 4 <ul><li>Infant will search for hidden objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Does infant understand the object as something that exists separate from the scheme applied to find the object? </li></ul><ul><li>No. Evidence? </li></ul><ul><li>A not B error. </li></ul>
  25. 25. A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
  26. 26. A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
  27. 27. A trials The A not B task 1 The A not B task
  28. 28. A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
  29. 29. A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
  30. 30. A trials The A not B task 2 The A not B task
  31. 31. B trials The A not B task The A not B task
  32. 32. B trials The A not B task The A not B task
  33. 33. B trials The A not B task ??
  34. 34. A not B error <ul><li>Infant continues to search at the first hiding location after object is hidden in the new location. </li></ul><ul><li>Object still subjectively understood. </li></ul><ul><li>Object remains associated with a previously successful scheme. </li></ul>
  35. 35. Stage 5 (12-18 months) <ul><li>Stage of Tertiary Circular Reactions. </li></ul><ul><li>Actions varied in an experimental fashion. </li></ul><ul><li>Pursuit of novelty </li></ul><ul><li>New means are discovered. </li></ul><ul><li>Limited to physical actions taken on objects </li></ul>
  36. 36. Object concept at stage 5. <ul><li>Can solve A not B. </li></ul><ul><li>Cannot solve A not B with invisible displacement (Example from Piaget). </li></ul>
  37. 37. Stage 5 and invisible displacement <ul><li>Can only imagine the object as existing where it was last hidden. </li></ul><ul><li>Invisible displacement requires the infant to mentally calculate the new location of the object. </li></ul>
  38. 38. Stage 6 (18-24 months) <ul><li>Can solve object search with invisible displacement. </li></ul><ul><li>Infants now mentally represent physically absent objects. </li></ul><ul><li>Understands object as something that exists independently of sensory-motor action. </li></ul>
  39. 39. Stage 6 (18-24 months) <ul><li>Sensori-motor period culminates with the emergence of the Symbolic function </li></ul><ul><li>An idea or mental image is used to stand-in for a perceptually absent object </li></ul><ul><li>Trial-and-error problem solving does not need to enacted but can undertaken through mental combination. </li></ul>
  40. 40. Summary <ul><li>Sensori-motor period culminates in the emergence of symbolic representation. </li></ul><ul><li>Object permanence understood. </li></ul><ul><li>Basic means-ends skills have emerged. </li></ul>
  41. 41. Piaget – Part 2 Beyond the sensorimotor period
  42. 42. III: The pre-operational period <ul><li>Symbolic thought without operations. </li></ul><ul><li>Operations: logical principles that are applied to symbols rather than objects. </li></ul><ul><li>3 examples: reversibility, compensation, and identity </li></ul><ul><li>In the absence of operations, thinking is governed more by appearance than logical necessity. </li></ul>
  43. 43. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  44. 44. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Conservation of liquid
  45. 45. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  46. 46. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  47. 47. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  48. 48. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  49. 49. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  50. 50. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  51. 51. <ul><li>Why do pre-operational children fail problems of conservation? </li></ul><ul><li>Because their thinking is not governed by principles of reversibility, compensation and identity </li></ul>Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  52. 52. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Reversibility: The pouring of water into the small container can be reversed.
  53. 53. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Compensation: A decrease in the height of the new container is compensated by an increase in its width
  54. 54. Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation Identity: No amount of liquid has been added or taken away.
  55. 55. <ul><li>Why do pre-operational children fail problems of conservation? </li></ul><ul><li>Because their thinking is not governed by principles of reversibility, compensation and identity </li></ul><ul><li>If children applied these principles, they would conclude liquid is conserved </li></ul>Pre-operational thinking and problems of conservation
  56. 56. Characteristics of Pre-Operational Thinking <ul><li>Not governed by logical operations </li></ul><ul><li>Consequently, it appears egocentric (e.g., 3 mountains task) and intuitive (e.g., conservation tasks) </li></ul>
  57. 57. Doll 1 Doll 2 Child 3 Mountains Task
  58. 58. Doll 1 Doll 2 Child 3 Mountains Task
  59. 59. Characteristics of Pre-Operational Thinking <ul><li>(1) Egocentric </li></ul><ul><li>(2) Intuitive  problem solving is not reasoned or logical </li></ul>
  60. 60. Nature of intuitive reasoning <ul><li>No reversibility  Cannot mentally undo a given action. </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual centration  Focus on only one dimension of a problem. </li></ul><ul><li>States versus transformations  Transformations relating different states ignored. </li></ul>
  61. 61. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul>
  62. 62. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Other conservation problems. </li></ul>
  63. 63. Conservation of mass
  64. 64. Conservation of mass
  65. 65. Conservation of mass
  66. 66. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Other conservation problems. </li></ul>
  67. 67. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Other conservation problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Emotion reasoning. </li></ul>
  68. 68. Emotion reasoning
  69. 69. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Other conservation problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Emotion reasoning. </li></ul><ul><li>Moral reasoning. </li></ul>
  70. 70. What makes Pre-operational thinking stage-like? <ul><li>Because it appears to be a general characteristic of children’s thinking at this age. </li></ul><ul><li>Examples: </li></ul><ul><li>Other conservation problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Emotion reasoning. </li></ul><ul><li>Moral reasoning.  focus on consequences </li></ul>
  71. 71. IV: Concrete operational thinking (7-12 years) <ul><li>Qualitatively different reasoning in conservation problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Flexible and decentered. </li></ul><ul><li>Co-ordination of multiple dimensions. </li></ul><ul><li>Logical vs. empirical problem solving. </li></ul><ul><li>Reversibility. </li></ul><ul><li>Awareness of transformations. </li></ul>
  72. 72. IV: Concrete operational thinking (7-12 years) <ul><li>Physical operations now internalized and have become cognitive </li></ul><ul><li>Still, logic directed at physical or concrete problems </li></ul>
  73. 73. Horizontal decalage <ul><li>Different conservation problems solved at different ages. </li></ul><ul><li>Some claim it is a threat to Piaget’s domain general view of cognitive development </li></ul><ul><li>Example: volume vs mass </li></ul><ul><li>But, invariant sequence observed. </li></ul>
  74. 74. V: Formal operations <ul><li>Thought no longer applied strictly to concrete problems. </li></ul><ul><li>Directed inward: thought becomes the object of thought. </li></ul><ul><li>Advances in use of deductive and inductive logic </li></ul>
  75. 75. V: Formal operations <ul><li>Deductive thought in period of concrete operations confined to familiar everyday experience: “If Sam steals Tim’s toy, then how will Tim feel?” </li></ul><ul><li>Formal operations: “If we could eliminate injustice, would the world live in peace?” </li></ul><ul><li>Thinking goes beyond experience, more abstract </li></ul>
  76. 76. Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Example: Pendulum problem </li></ul><ul><li>Scientific thinking: from specific observations to general conclusions through hypothesis-testing </li></ul>
  77. 77. Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Example: Pendulum problem </li></ul>How fast?
  78. 78. Inductive reasoning <ul><li>Formal operational children will systematically test all possibilities before arriving at a conclusion </li></ul>
  79. 79. VI: Evaluating Piaget <ul><li>Difficult. </li></ul><ul><li>An enormous theory. </li></ul><ul><li>Covers many ages and issues in development. </li></ul>
  80. 80. Strengths <ul><li>Active rather than passive view of the child. </li></ul><ul><li>Revealed important invariants in cognitive development. </li></ul><ul><li>Errors informative. </li></ul><ul><li>Perceptual-motor learning rather than language important for development. </li></ul><ul><li>Tasks. </li></ul>
  81. 81. Weaknesses <ul><li>The competence-performance distinction </li></ul>
  82. 82. Competence <ul><li>Knowledge, rules, and concepts that form the basis of cognition. </li></ul><ul><li>Inferred from behaviour. </li></ul>
  83. 83. Performance <ul><li>Energy level, interest, attention, language skills, motivation etc. </li></ul><ul><li>Factors that effect the expression of a competence. </li></ul>
  84. 84. Competence-performance distinction. <ul><li>Piaget attributed infants success (or lack of success) to competence. </li></ul><ul><li>However, he gave no consideration to performance factors that may have constrained the expression of knowledge. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: A not B </li></ul>
  85. 85. Performance-competence distinction and A not B <ul><li>A not B errors thought to indicate poor understanding of objects. </li></ul><ul><li>However, motor components of the task may constrain the expression of infants knowledge. </li></ul><ul><li>Example: Baillergeon. </li></ul><ul><li>Object permanence observed in 5 month-olds using a looking time task. </li></ul>
  86. 86. Other examples <ul><li>Borke (1975) & the 3 mountains task. </li></ul><ul><li>Bruner (1966) & the liquid conservation task. </li></ul><ul><li>More detailed task analysis required. </li></ul>
  87. 87. Stages? <ul><li>Stage like progression only observed if one assumes a bird-eye view. </li></ul><ul><li>Closer inspection reveals more continuous changes (Siegler, 1988). </li></ul>
  88. 88. Summary <ul><li>Piaget’s theory is wide-ranging and influential. </li></ul><ul><li>Source of continued controversy. </li></ul><ul><li>People continue to address many of the questions he raised, but using different methods and concepts. </li></ul>

×