Cognition + development (not on spec)

Schema
Child = scientist
Motivation to learn
Assimilation
Accommodation
Biological maturation

Mental framework of beliefs and expectations that influence cognitive processing
Developed from experience and learning

Learn by interacting with the environment

When we are in disequilibrium (existing schemas can't explain something new)
We adapt our knowledge to enter equilibrium

Add new info to existing schema

Radically modify existing schema or form new ones

Depending on age, we are capable of different cognitive skills

+ Evidence for discovery learning
+ Application to education
- Chinese teaching
- Underestimated role of others
- Overemphasised disequilibrium

Howe
Groups of 4
9-12y
Investigate how objects move down a slope
All showed improved understanding and cam to their own conclusions

Less copying and dictated teaching
Activity orientated so children explore the curriculum
- Chinese students 50+ and dictated with low discovery but achieve highly

Vygotsky
MKO
Piaget suggest learning is an individual process
Implies teachers are useless

Piaget sample = clever middle class
Deci + Ryan suggest equilibrium and feeling competent leads to motivation to learn

Sensorimotor = 0-2y
Pre-operational = 2-7y
Concrete operational = 7-11y
Formal operation = 11y+

Object permanence @8m - objects still exist when out of sight
Learn via circular reactions - repeat to test sensorimotor relationships

Egocentric
No conservation
No class inclusion

Knowledge that quantity remains the same even when the appearance of an object changes

Recognising classes of objects have subsets and are subsets of larger classes

Piaget and Inhelder
"Are there more dogs than animals?"
5 dogs and 2 cats

Conservation
Decentration
Class inclusion

Formal reasoning
Hypothetico deductive thinking
Abstract logic

+ Application to school curriculum
- Autism
+ Egocentricity support
- Hughes' policeman doll study
- Underestimated object permanence
- Underestimated conservation

Based on age
- Autistic develop language, reasoning and egocentrism separately

Piaget and Inhelder
Only 7/8y complete 3 mountain task
- Hughes' policeman doll study found 90% pre-schoolers could do it

Bower
4m surprised when toy hidden behind screen no longer there when screen removed

McGarrigle and Donaldson
Naughty Teddy study
62% 6y showed conservation
Compared to 16% in Piaget study

Knowledge is intermental then intramental
Cultural differences
MKO
Zone of proximal development
Scaffolding

What we learn depends on our culture because of MKOs etc.

Space between present level of development and potential level of development

Wood, Bruner and Ross (1976)

General prompt
Specific verbal instruction
Indication of materials
Preparation for child
Demonstration

+ Culture support
+ MKO evidence
+ Scaffolding evidence
- Chinese teaching
- Low generalisability

Gredler
Papua New Guinea children count 1-29 using body
Adults struggle with large numbers

Roazi and Bryant
4-5y estimate no. sweets in jar
Increased accuracy when given prompts by older student

Vankeer and Verhaege
7y tutored by 10y and classroom teaching = more reading progress than control
- Chinese teaching = 50+ students and low interaction

Only applies to collectivism
Counter with Piaget

Criticism of Piaget object permanence (babies struggle to lift heads)
Violation of expectation
Experiment
Infant physical reasoning

Baillargeon and Graber 1987
24 babies
5-6m
Familiarisation event
Then expected and then unexpected (big bunny not seen in screen)
Looked 7.96s longer at unexpected (OP)

Physical reasoning system
Object persistence
Event categories developed

Innate ability to learn

Object remains in existence and doesn't spontaneously change shape

Ways in which object interact (occlusion)

+ High control
+ Physical reasoning system support
- Low internal validity
- Support Piaget

Children on parent's knees
Parents blindfolded
2 observers who didn't know design
Double blind

All infants = good understanding of object properties regardless of culture

Don't know how babies react to violation of expectation
Looked longer at big rabbit because it's more interesting

Surprise doesn't equal object permanence
Bremner = difference between acting and understanding in accordance with a principle

Selman

Disagrees with Piaget
Selman (1971)
Stages of development

Disagrees with domain general approach
Perspective taking doesn't happen at same time as cognition and language

60pps
4-6y
Asked about perspective situation
Holly, tree, cat etc.

Egocentric = 3-6y
Social informational = 6-8y
Self reflective = 8-10y
Mutual = 10-12y
Social and conventional systems = 12y+

Recognise self and others have different thoughts and feelings
Frequently confuse the 2

Understand different perspectives are due to access to different info

Fully understand other's perspectives
Know that others can do the same

Look at situation from own and other's perspective at same time

Understanding other's viewpoints is not enough to reach agreement
Social conventions needed to keep order

+ Support for stages
+ Support for importance of perspective taking
- Ignores social factors
- Cultural differences

Selman
+ive correlation for age and perspective
Gurucharri and Selman
Same Correlation for longitudinal study

Buijzen and Valkenburg
-ive correlation between age/perspective and coercive behaviour
Child persuades parent to buy something
Link between perspective and healthy social behaviour

Fitzgerald and White
More growth in perspective when parents encourage child to take perspective of someone they hurt
Empathy and family important

Wu and Kysar
American and Chinese children
Chinese more advanced perspective
Selman suggested it was universal

Personal understanding of what other ppl are thinking and feeling

ASD
Meltzoff 1988
Sally Anne 1985 - Baron Cohen
Eye task 1997 - Baron Cohen

Impairments in Empathy, social communication and social imagination

A = adult tries to open jar to add beads
B = adult opens jar and adds beads
18m added beads in both conditions
Understood intentions

Sally Anne task
20 = ASD
14 = Downs Syndrome
ASD = 20%
DS = 85%
ToM déficit explains ASD

Eye task
Compare eye pics to emotions
Non ASD accuracy = 20.3
ASD = 16.3
Suggests bio basis for ASD

+ Application to understanding ASD
- Not all ASD have ToM issues and some non ASD have ToM issues
- Relies on Sally Anne task
- Low eco validity
- Perspective taking is not ToM

Sally Anne task may explain ASD
Provides explanation for difficulty in social communication
- Not all ASD have ToM issues and some non ASD have ToM issues

Bloom and German = False belief tasks have low validity
Some children can role play but not SAT
SAT tests visual memory, not ToM

No mouths / body language

Switching perspective = see from another viewpoint
ToM= understanding why perspective is different
Separate cognitive abilities

Rizzolatti
Gallese and Goldman 1998
Evolution - Ramachandran 2011
Autism - Ramachandran and Oberman 2006
Broken mirror theory

Rizzolatti
Electrical in monkey motor cortex increased when reaching for something
Same when watching someone else reach for something

1998
MN respond to observed actions and to intentions behind behaviour
Involved in perspective and ToM

2011
Humans need to be able to understand other's intentions, emotions and perspectives to be able to live in large groups

2006
Broken mirror theory

Neurological deficits in MN system prevent child imitating and understanding social behaviour in others
Causes difficulty in social communication

+ Supprt
+ Explains ASD
- ASD MN link is inconsistent
+ Support for MN perspective link
- weak evidence
- Hard to research

Haker
Increased activity in Brodmann's Area 9 when yawning in response to yawns
BA9 = high MN
Yawning linked to empathy

Hadjikhani
Evidence for link between ASD and MN dysfunction
Reduced thickness of pars opercularis
PO = high MN
- Hamilton. Systematic review of 25 studies found ASD MN link inconsistent

Maranesi
MN in motor cortex fired according to position and angle of experimenters gesture
Physical perspective
- Bekkali. MN Social cognition link only has weak evidence

Scanning measures brain areas and not individual neurons
Implanted electrodes useful but unethical for humans