Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Theories of Cognitive Development - Coggle Diagram
Theories of
Cognitive Development
Scientific Method
psychology, like other scientific disciplines, follows the scientific method.
scientists observe the world and ask questions about the extent to which what we see is generalisable, whether the phenomenon we have noticed might operate in similar ways to other things we've seen in the world or whether it might operate differently.
we ask questions, link those to what we know from the literature and theory, and hypothesise how we think this phenomenon might work
we formalise those hypotheses into testable predictions and design some kind of experiment that allows us to collect some data, see whether our predictions are right, adjust the design, refine the hypothesis, collect more data, and so on.
theory
at some point, we think we have refined our thinking sufficiently to feel like we have a solid understanding of how the thing we're studying works, and we develop our understanding into a
theory
.
the theory we develop then informs the scientific process.
people mostly think that theory feeds straight into the question-asking process, but a theoretical perspective also impacts the observations that we make.
in developmental psych, theory attempts to provide a framework to explain the nature of change over time and the processes that are involved
nature vs nurture, critical vs sensitive periods, continuous vs discontinuous change
why do we need theory?
theories are valuable to a field of scientific endeavour because they organise information, and provide a framework that adds meaning to individual data points and studies.
by looking at a set of given phenomena throughout different theoretical lenses, we are able to shift perspectives and explore and test new possibilities.
theory guides research questions > make predictions that can then be tested.
what is a theory?
typically a set of interconnected statements that attempt to describe unobserved structures, mechanisms or processes, and explain how they relate to each other and to observable behaviour
theories will often lay out hypotheses that can be tested with empirical work > this work might confirm or disprove components of a theory.
the researcher will update their ideas.
empirical work can never prove a theory is entirely true > always possible that someone will provide disconfirming evidence in the future.
theories are good if they are:
logically sound;
internally consistent, built on previous theory, different components don't contradict each other.
empirically sound;
there is data to support each component of the theory.
clear, testable, and parsimonious;
the most simple explanation for a given phenomenon that has the fewest number of constructs required is ideal. should propose ideas that are measurable and falsifiable > possible to prove that it's incorrect.
covers a large area of science;
attempts to account for a relatively large area of scientific endeavour.
hard to vary;
not very flexible > theory isn't good if it can be used to explain every possible outcome of an experiment.
Jean Piaget
was not initially interested in psychology > spent a long time studying molluscs.
most of the ideas in Piaget's theory came from conversations he had with children while he administered intelligence tests (assisted in standardising the tests), and observations with his own children.
didn't ever get a psych degree, but wrote more than 50 books and 500 papers.
constructivist theory
depicts children as constructing knowledge for themselves via interactions and experiences with their environment.
children are seen as:
scientific problem solvers > when children encounter problems, they test out hypotheses and draw conclusions about how things work from interactions with their environment.
active
learning may important lessons on their own
intrinsically motivated to learn
discontinuous
: distinct hierarchical stages
qualitative change
broad applicability across topics and contexts
brief transitions between his proposed stages
invariant sequence > all children move through all four proposed stages, each building on the previous one.
the nature of the skills that children can demonstrate
within
a stage are relatively similar, but
between
stages are really different.
stages of cognitive development
sensorimotor:
object permanence: A not B error task > babies trying to search for hidden objects > will continue to search in an old location even when they watch you move it to a new location.
preoperational:
symbolism: using objects to stand in for others > using a block for a phone, etc.
egocentric: difficulty seeing the world from the perspective of another person.
three mountains problem > children tend to assume that everyone sees the same world they do
theory of mind: understanding that other people have different preferences, ideas, and knowledge than you do
lack of conservation: fail conservation of volume and conservation of number tasks
centration: focus on a single perceptual variable to make decisions
concrete operational:
pass conservation tasks, less centration
formal operational:
begin to reason about truth, justice, and ethics
sources of learning and continuity
argued that children learned and changed their understanding of how the world works via a combination of assimilation and accommodation.
assimilation:
integrating your new reality into what you already know. interpreting the world through the lens of current understanding. applying your current schema of how something works to a new reality.
accommodation:
updating your understanding to incorporate changes in the world that you're experiencing.
equilibration:
balance between assimilation and accommodation.
diequilibration > when you're in the process of updating your schema
what did piaget get right?
cognition during childhood is important
changes in cognition are surprising and interesting (and worth studying)
developmental psychologists before Piaget were largely behaviourists > they took a very narrow view of childhood, emphasising learning, basic learning theory, conditioning, stimuli, general discrimination, etc
did not study the higher-order cognition we now know children are capable of.
great insights can come from studying children in context.
in pursuit of experimental control, we often study cognition in infants using carefully timed experiments and paradigms. piaget studied children by watching them play, and older children by asking them questions.
tradeoff > by gaining experimental control, you may lose validity (measuring the ability as it plays out in the real world)
what did piaget get wrong?
empirical evidence for strict stages is weak
empirical work has shown that there's lots of variability, even with stages.
abilities like conservation are not an "all or nothing" thing, usually, it takes time for different parts of the ability to be learned.
little explanation of mechanisms of change.
assimilation and accomodation don't easily account for the major shifts that occur between his proposed stages.
not enough emphasis on "performance"
how children's understanding or knowledge might differ from their ability to show you that understanding or knowledge by performance on a task.
why children perform the way they do.
underestimate children's abilities.
reliance on children's verbal answers means that he missed some early signs of many cognitive capacities > new methods show that at least the beginnings of many complex cognitive capacities develop much earlier than Piaget thought
Other Professors
Prof Eleanor Gibson
theory
: ecological theory of perceptual development
studied children in context.
domain:
perception
best known for:
idea of affordances
affordances: an action possibility that is formed by the relationship between an agent (baby) and their environment.
argues that a problem that infants need to solve throughout development is learning about what their changing bodies are capable of when interacting with the changing environment
what is possible given the current state of their body and the current context of the environment.
famous studies:
visual cliff.
putting infants an animals on a platform of glass. underneath half, there was a chequered pattern right underneath the glass, and on the other half the pattern was on the floor (creates the illusion of a drop, but they're on the glass so there isn't one)
putting crawling infants on the "shallow side" and their mother on the other side, and have the mother encourage the baby to crawl across the visual cliff.
babies avoid the "deep side" because of affords > they are learning that they are capable of doing.
Prof Esther Thelan
theory:
dynamic systems theory
mostly applied in the context of motor and language development
acknowledged that the developmental change is the result of complex interactions between the infant's brain, body, and the environment, all of which are changing.
domain:
motor and language development.
best known for:
longitudinal studies of reaching/walking, psychophysiological measures
looking at how movement was changing and becoming more, and sometimes less, coordinated as infants acquired new skills during the process of change.
involved hoking infants up to sensors, some of which measured electrical activity produced by muscle (EMG), and others that tracked movement.
looking at the coordination of infant's limbs as they acquired new skills like walking and reaching.
would go to the infants' houses with her equipment
Prof Alison Gopnik
theory:
theory theory
play has a unique function in childhood, and it's play that makes children particularly well-suited for learning, and in many cases, better at learning than adults.
domain:
cognitive development.
best known for:
thinking about infants/children like scientists (theory theory)
argues that infants acquire knowledge by testing out theories, postulating hypotheses, collecting data, extracting statistics, and updating their ideas.
famous studies:
blicket detector (causal learning), broccoli and crackers (theory of mind)
Prof Liz Spelke
theory:
core knowledge theory
domain:
perceptual and cognitive development
best known for:
claims that infants have an innate understanding of the physical world and an innate understanding of number.
contrary to piaget > contstructivism
.
claims that infants have an innate understanding of the physical concepts like gravity, and how objects with other objects.
liz has shown that relatively young infants are sensitive to numerical distinctions.