Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

intro to developmental - Coggle Diagram

- - - - active experience: ppl can shape what they know by what they engage w to learn - actively explore ideas, test theories, construct concepts
      - held and hein 1963: 2 kittens were placed in a striped environment, one allowed to walk by itself (active learning), one yolked (passive learning) for 6 weeks. the passive failed tests on paw placement and blinking at a looming object - experience need to be active for proper learning
    - - twin studies: MZ twwins share 100% of their DNA, DZ twins share 50% like all bio siblings: use correlation studies to draw conclusions about the heritability of traits
        
        twins early development study TEDS: birth records of kids born in england and wales 1994-1996, 15,000 partics in OG signup, DNA studies of 5000 pairs of twins
        
        cannot account for the role of the environment so have to do adoption studies for the role of environment and role of genetics separate from both - best genetic studies are MZ twins who are raised apart
    - - lorenz: theres a critical period for attachment, at least in geese: about 90 days after hatching. the incubated goslings had him as the first moving thing they saw when they hatched so they attached to him and followed him everywhere
        
        hess 1958: the degree of the imprinting depends on the distance and the time after hatching
  - - - looking time measures: interest in something is indicated through time spent looking at it
    - - sally anne task: maxi task but different. sally puts the ball in the basket then she leaves. anne comes along and moves the ball from the basket to the box. when sally comes back hwere is she gonna look the basket or the box
      - duplo task: a girl doll puts some bananas inside one fridge and moves away but is kept in sight. experimenter moves the bananas from current fridge to a new one. prompts to show the important information like the girl doll cant see the experimenters actions throughout. kid then asked to act out what happens next w the doll
    - - the spur: a trolley is rolling down the tracks uncontrolled and there's an upcoming junction. on the track that the trolley is currently taking are 5 ppl that are strapped to it. on the track that branches off, 1 person is strapped down. do you pull the lever to divert the trolley down the branch or let it roll - foot 1967
      - the fat man: the trolley is rolling uncontrollably and youre stood on a bridge w ur fat friend watching it go. beyond the bridge down the tracks are 5 ppl strapped down and are gonna die. your friend is fat enough that he'll stop the trolley. do you push your friend over the edge or do you let the trolley roll - thomson 1976
- - - - knowledge is not innate but actively learnt - kids are blank slates so info is not innate
      - construction of the ways of the world is schemata: patterns of behaviour, mental models, mental operations
      - seeks an equilibrium of learning processes: assimilation applying an old schema to a new situation. accomodation adjusting old schemas and building new ones to include the new info
  - - - primary circular reactions: action and response solely involves the infant's own body - 1-4m/o
      - secondary circular response: infant's action gains a response from an object or person so baby repeats the action - 4-8m/o
      - tertiary circular reactions: an action leads to a pleasing result so the baby will repeat the action or do similar actions for similar results - 12-18m/o
    - - kellman and spelke 1983: when studying looking time, sensorimotor kids do pass object permanence
  - - - number: kids are presented w 2 lines of identical articles in identical layout, do the 2 lines have the same amount of items? yes, then the 2nd line is spread out, do the two lines have the same amount of items? preops say no
      - length: when 2 lines the same length are directly parallel, preop says theyre the same length, but when theyre offset so they're not directly in line, preop says no
      - liquid: when the same amount of water is in 2 identical beakers preop says theres equal water, when in 1 skinny and 1 wide beaker, there isnt the same amount
      - mass: when 2 pieces of clay are in the exact same shape, preop says theyre the same mass, but when 1 is flattened, preop says unidentical mass
      - area: do the shapes cover the same amount of area when theyre close together and when theyre separated
      - weight: when 2 pieces of clay re demonstrated to have shown the same weight, does this change when they're removed from the scales and one is flattened
      - volume: does the water level of 2 beakers rise equally when 2 pieces of equal clay are dropped in, and when only 1 piece is dropped in a ball and one a misshapen piece
      - demand characteristics: kids play along w the experimenter: when they see the experimenter make a change they assume the experimenter wants them to answer that a change has been made no matter the question, but when a teddy makes the transformation they pass conservation tasks - McGarrigle and Donaldson 1974
    - - when the question is rephrased to emphasise class, preop kids can pass the class inclusion test: if all the cows were sleeping, half were black, and they were asked if there were more black cows or sleeping cows, preop kids pass - mcgarigle and donaldson 1978
  - - - however the different aspects of conservation dont come about at the same time, usually in stages: number by 5-6, volume by 10-11 - problematic for piaget but he said that once principles are learnt they might not be instantly applied
- - - - infants know the spatial location of objects, they exist continuously even occluded, and solid objects cant pass through one another
      - individ variation: fast habituators only differed in habituation at the impossible event
      - cashon and cohen 2000 - when habituated to the impossible event babies broke habituation at the possible event - preference for novelty
    - - mix et al 2002: maybe the kids were telling the diff thru contour length comparisons: looking at the total ength around each of the dots then adding em together - could explain why not so much dishabituation at 8 and 12 dots because the contour length diff isnt that great. - perhaps infants look at continous extent (like the area or contour length) of the stim instead of the number
      - feigenson 2005 - did the dot test but w mismatched shapes like fruit - number discrimm could be done this way as well - and continuous extent was done w identical dots
    - - cheng and newcombe 2005: the kids only used geo cos the room was small. when in a larger room they used the colour of the wall for orientation - learmonth et al 2002
    - - these domains are independent of each other until they are bound by lang
- - - - robbins 1996: exec function linked to the prefrontal cortex
      - WMM: baddeley and hitch 1974 came up w the WMM which has the central exec to assign tasks to the slave systems - perhaps its in the prefrontal cortex
      - giedd et al 1999: childhood to adolescent changes: synaptic pruning happens in childhood where all the newly made synapses and neurons that arent used often are cut for efficiency. growth spurt of myelination for neurons. increase and decrease of grey matter
      - deoni et al 2011 - huge myelination in the beginning 300 days of life, starts from the brain stem then works to the frontal cortex
    - - diamond 1990: a not b error governed by prefrontal cortex functioning: baby monkeys w intact brains could do the a not b task quite easily but monkeys w lesions to the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex could not do the tasks w/o at least a little delay
      - bell and fox 1992: stuck EEG caps on 7-12 mo babies and compared passers and non passers of a not b task: those w higher activity in the prefrontal cortex passed the a not b task
- - - - braddick 1993: babies were habituated to seeing a grate of bars all oriented to one direction with random changes in thickness and placement, then change in orientation and keep on the random change of the new orientation - cortical orientation perception develops at 3 weeks
    - - pasternak et al 1981: kittens who were raised in a stroboscopic illumination chamber where things moved through a series of still pictures rather than smooth motion didnt have directional motion neurons in the visual cortex
  - - - the capabilities of a baby walking down a slope - adolph 1995- or crossing a barrier - schmuckler 1986 - depend on the walking experience rather than the age of the baby
      - the visual cliff: gibson and walk 1960: 6-14 mo babies re places on a checkerboard covered w a thick clear surface. one side of the board gently slopes away from the middle and the other has a cliff - covered w the surface so can walk over it. mam is places around the side and baby has to crawl to mam. at the shallow side babies crawl to mam fine. when mam at the deep end babies dont like to crawl to mam cos visual says theres danger but touch says its fine. 7-8m 35% of 11 day crawlers avoided the drop, 65% of 41 day crawlers avoided the drop
        
        adolph 2000: in a sim paradigm success depended on posture achieved - sitting vs crawling
        
        experience might not be crucial for animals: chicks and goats needed 1 day, 3-4 weeks for rats and kittens, 6--10m for human babies
- - - - van IJzendoorn et al 1999: secure 62%, avoidant 15%, resistant 9%, disorganised 15%
    - - reunion based on proximity and contact seeking, contact maintaining, avoidance behaviour, resistance behaviour
      - type A - insecure avoidant - not much proximity seeking or secure base behaviour, lots of exploring behaviour, not much separation or stranger anxiety and not resistent but not fussed at reunion
      - type b - secure - lots of proximity seeking, exploring, secure base behaviour, l=moderate amount of anxieties, seeks comfort from mam on reunion
      - type c - insecure resistant - lots of proximity seeking, no exploring or secure base behaviour, lots of separation and stranger anxiety but on reunion resists the comfort from the caregiver - clingy but resistant
      - type d - disorganised attachment - main and solomon 1986 - attachment is not consistent or organised, seeks comfort from caregiver but is then indifferent, seeks comfort from strangers as misdirected behaviour, freezes or fears parent on reunion
  - - - clarke and steward 1994 - kids who experience a regular long time w/o their parents, like aprents being at work, can still normally attach to parents
      - van IJzendoorn 1990 - kids attach to those who are more sensitive to their cues and needs rather than who is around them the most
      - NICHD 2006: higher quality care is associated w better cog and lang skills until 11 y/o but more overall care associated w aggression in 12 y/o
    - - mind-mindedness meins 2001 - the content of the response matters more than the promptness - caregivers who acted as if the kid was an agent capable of intentional action had the best responses: need to consider infant's gaze, infant's object-directed action and infant's attention - imitation and considering the infant as an independent agent and talking to the infant as tho kid is asking questions or answering the parent - strongly related to secure attachment
    - - strange situation attachment measures not secure over time: 46% stability 15-36 m/o NICHD 2001
      - adult attachment: autonomous, dismissing, preoccupied, unresolved: waters et al 2000 - 72% of adults w strange situation at infancy remained in the same category but 22% changed, and 44% of those had bad life experiences
        
        doesn't work for high risk samples: weinfield 2000: changes in class linked to family function, maltreatment and maternal deprivation
- - - - memory: kids did remember where the chocolate was OG put by maxi and where it were moved to
      - competing ideas: theres a competition of info for the kid where the choco is actually and where maxi put it - when the choco is removed from the situation completely then the current position of the choco is nowhere so 4y/o can pass - 3 y/o canna
      - the sally anne task - 4y/o can pass but 3y/o canna - baron-cohen et al 1984 - tom false belief develops between 3 and 4
  - - - goals of actor: woodward 1998: 9mo babies watched repeatedly a hand reach from the same side to go to the left of 2 toys on a screen and grab it, habituated, then in the test either the two toys swapped but the path of the hand stayed the same or the path of the hand changed but still grabbed the same toy. 8mo looked longer at the change in goal rather than the change in direction, and 5mo didnt show the same behaviour. between 6-9mo kids develop the capability to perceive and predict the intentions of others and their actions therefore.
      - false belief: onishi and baillargeon 2005: 15mo presented w a scenario w 2 hiding boxes, an object, and a person behind a screen. in training, the true belief partics were shown that the observer could see the objject move into the yellow box and stay there, in false belief baby saw that the observer saw the object go into the yellow box but not that it was moved to the green box. babies then watched the observer either look in the yellow or the green box. babies looked longer if in the false belief scenario the observer looked in the green box - they knew the actor had the false belief of object being in the yellow box
  - - - implicit: before 4yo - perner and ruffman 2005 - understanding behaviour but not mental states. wellman and woolley 1992 - understand the simple desires that someone might want something or to do something but not why, use this to predict behaviour
      - explicit: after 4yo, verbal performance of tom. wellman 1990 - theory theory, where the individ theorises about the other's mental states and generate new hypotheses around these. harris 1991 - simulation theory, individ imagines themselves in the shoes of the other person. baron cohen 1995 - modularity theory, where tom is an innate capacity that needs maturation for development
    - - kulke 2018: implicit tom, fragile tom, or only 1 type of tom? replicability problems w previous studies
      - rubio fernandes and geurtes 2013: the maxi task is long, scripted, and full of props which might confuse a kid, so a shorter, non verbal task is more appropriate - thhe duplo task is non verbal, interactive, non binary answer, and focuses on the scenario rather than what would be considered to be 'real'
      - 3.5 yo, 80% failed the unexpected contents task, 80% passed the duplo task. 80/% failed when the doll was taken out of the scene at any given point, 80% failed when asked to give a verbal answer
      - there's not a discontinuous nature to tom development, but rather tom in early years is fragile and needs time to be applied to more novel scenarios
- - - - if jon broke 1 cup on purpose but william broke 10 cups by accident, who is naughtier? moral realism kids will say william bc he broke more cups, moral relativism kids will say jon cos he broke the cup on purpose - intent vs impact
  - - - moral goodness: feel concern for others despite moral costs. hastings 2007- by 13-14mo prosocial behaviour can be seen
      - moral evaluation: hamlin et al 2007 - morality plays shown babies. 14 of the 16 10mo and all the 6 mo reached for the helper - babies show moral evaluation. hamlin et al 2011 - 3 mo avooid the hinderer but 6mo positively evaluate the helper
      - moral retribution: hamlin 2012 pre speaking infants prefer appropriately antisocial individs, hinderer bashers, over inappropriate antisocial individs, hinderers, early as 5mo. sloane et al 2012- 19mo liked it when ther was equal sharing of biccies between 2 puppets and didnt like it when there was unequal sharing
- - - - deficits in social communication and interaction
        
        social emotional reciprocity: abnormal social approach, failure for normal convo back and forth, reduced sharing of emotions or interests, failure to initiate or respond to social interactions
        
        nonverbal comm behaviours for social interaction: poor integrated verbal and non verbal comm, abnormal eye contact and body lang, deficits in understanding and use of gestures, lack of facial expression
        
        developing, maintaining and understanding relationships: difficulty adjusting behaviours to contexts, difficulty sharing play, little interest in peers
      - restricted and repetitive behaviours
        
        repetitive use of motor movements, objects and speech: simple motor stereotyping, lining up toys, echolalia
        
        insistence on sameness, inflexibility to routines, ritualised patterns: extreme distress at small changes, transition difficulties, rigid thinking, greeting rituals, same food everyday
        
        hyperfixation: excessive perseverative interests
        
        hyper/hypoactivity to sensory aspects of the environment: indifference to pain/temp, adverse response to sounds/textures, excessive smelling/touching, visual fascinations
    - - deficit in tom: 20% autists passed the sally anne task but 85% neurotypicals pass - some autists passed so tom isnt everything - happe 1995
      - exec disfunction: hill 2004 found poor planning in autists. also poor inhibition planning, working memory, set shifting, multitasking
      - weak central coherence: local (focusing on details) vs global (looking at the whole picture) processing styles. frith and happe 1994 - autists had local, detail orientated processing styles - when presented w a letter H made of small Es (navon figures) they couldn't see the whole, but when presented w a picture of a 3 wheel pram (embedded features) and asked to find the fault they could
      - extreme male brain: more males than females diagnosed w autism, higher testosterone levels in the womb for autists than other babies.
        
        systemising male brain vs empathising female brain. male brain is meant to be built to be better at finding systems and rules, whereas the female brain is meant to be built to be better at empathising and emotional intel, therefore autism is an exaggerated male brain
        
        but females are autistic, poor testosterone link evidence, poor evidence for the male/female brain differences in the poplus
      - altho there's no 1 theory covering for autism, autists vary in their performances w tom, exe function