Cognition and development key psychologists
Psychologist Key study Notes AO3
Piaget (1936) Piaget’s stages of intellectual + Bryant (1995) describes Piaget’s range of
development: topics as ingenious investigations of complex
1. Sensorimotor stage 0-2 topics.This suggests that Piaget’s stages
years. have been operationalised this increases the
a. The infant learns to theories falsifiability.
coordinate sensory + Evidence supports that there are qualitative
Juice starts at the same input with motor changes in cognitive development as a child
amount in the same size actions and at 8 matures. It should be viewed as a useful
glasses, the child is months develops model for understanding behaviour and
asked if they have the object permanence. generating research. Piaget’s stages are still
same amount of it. One 2. Pre-operational stage 2-7 applicable in understanding children’s
glass is then poured into years. cognitive development.
a thinner, taller glass and a. Children have a kind + Implies that children are not biologically
the same question was of logic and rely on ready to be taught certain concepts until a
asked. Children who had appearance rather specific age. It would be difficult for a
competed this stage than reality. At this pre-operational child to perform abstract
answered the same stage a child fails to calculations. Piaget said activities should be
amount whereas children see the logic that at an appropriate level and if a child is not
who hadn’t answered volume cannot mature enough they may acquire skills
that the tall glass had change. Children at superficially . The plowden report (1967)
more. this stage are talked about how Piaget’s theory led to major
Children were shown a egocentric. Children changes in primary education in the UK. This
set of pictures and asked have class inclusion shows real-world applications that Piaget’s
to choose the one that and classify objects theory has.
showed the doll’s into categories but - McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) set up a
perspective. 4 year old have difficult with number of conservation experiments where
children tended to smaller sub-groups. counters were moved by ‘accident’. They
choose their own 3. Concrete operational stage replicated the Piaget task with 4-6 yr olds
perspective rather than 7-11 years. and found most children answered
, the perspective of the a. Children acquire the incorrectly however, when a ‘naughty teddy’
doll. rudiments for logical appeared and knocked the counters closer
reasoning. As well as together 62% answered correctly, suggesting
achieving that children could conserve at this age as
conservation long as the way they were questioned did
however, children not put them off, meaning Piaget may have
still lack the ability to been wrong about conservation in the
think in the abstract. pe-operational stage.
4. Formal operational stage - Research demonstrated that Piaget
11+ years. underestimated children’s abilities at
a. Children can now younger ages and may have overestimated
solve abstract the ability to use abstract knowledge in the
problems. They can formal operational stage. Dasen (1994)
solve problems using claims ⅓ of adults ever reach this stage
hypothetico weakening Piaget’s concept meaning the
deductive stages may not be internally or externally
reasoning,where valid.
they can think like a
scientist. Children
display idealistic
thinking and can
imagine how things
might be if certain
changes are made.
Vygotsky (1934) Vygotsky proposed that children are + Vygotsky claims the role of culture has been
born with elementary mental supported in cross-cultural research e.g
functions such as perceptions and Gredler (1992) pointed to the primitive
memory. These then become higher counting system used in Papua New Guinea
mental functions through the as an example of how culture can limit
influence of culture, this function is cognitive development. This supports
The zone of proximal a biological format of natural Vygotsky’s view that cultural influences are
development is the development. key for cognitive development and can
region between a explain cultural differences in learning.
Psychologist Key study Notes AO3
Piaget (1936) Piaget’s stages of intellectual + Bryant (1995) describes Piaget’s range of
development: topics as ingenious investigations of complex
1. Sensorimotor stage 0-2 topics.This suggests that Piaget’s stages
years. have been operationalised this increases the
a. The infant learns to theories falsifiability.
coordinate sensory + Evidence supports that there are qualitative
Juice starts at the same input with motor changes in cognitive development as a child
amount in the same size actions and at 8 matures. It should be viewed as a useful
glasses, the child is months develops model for understanding behaviour and
asked if they have the object permanence. generating research. Piaget’s stages are still
same amount of it. One 2. Pre-operational stage 2-7 applicable in understanding children’s
glass is then poured into years. cognitive development.
a thinner, taller glass and a. Children have a kind + Implies that children are not biologically
the same question was of logic and rely on ready to be taught certain concepts until a
asked. Children who had appearance rather specific age. It would be difficult for a
competed this stage than reality. At this pre-operational child to perform abstract
answered the same stage a child fails to calculations. Piaget said activities should be
amount whereas children see the logic that at an appropriate level and if a child is not
who hadn’t answered volume cannot mature enough they may acquire skills
that the tall glass had change. Children at superficially . The plowden report (1967)
more. this stage are talked about how Piaget’s theory led to major
Children were shown a egocentric. Children changes in primary education in the UK. This
set of pictures and asked have class inclusion shows real-world applications that Piaget’s
to choose the one that and classify objects theory has.
showed the doll’s into categories but - McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) set up a
perspective. 4 year old have difficult with number of conservation experiments where
children tended to smaller sub-groups. counters were moved by ‘accident’. They
choose their own 3. Concrete operational stage replicated the Piaget task with 4-6 yr olds
perspective rather than 7-11 years. and found most children answered
, the perspective of the a. Children acquire the incorrectly however, when a ‘naughty teddy’
doll. rudiments for logical appeared and knocked the counters closer
reasoning. As well as together 62% answered correctly, suggesting
achieving that children could conserve at this age as
conservation long as the way they were questioned did
however, children not put them off, meaning Piaget may have
still lack the ability to been wrong about conservation in the
think in the abstract. pe-operational stage.
4. Formal operational stage - Research demonstrated that Piaget
11+ years. underestimated children’s abilities at
a. Children can now younger ages and may have overestimated
solve abstract the ability to use abstract knowledge in the
problems. They can formal operational stage. Dasen (1994)
solve problems using claims ⅓ of adults ever reach this stage
hypothetico weakening Piaget’s concept meaning the
deductive stages may not be internally or externally
reasoning,where valid.
they can think like a
scientist. Children
display idealistic
thinking and can
imagine how things
might be if certain
changes are made.
Vygotsky (1934) Vygotsky proposed that children are + Vygotsky claims the role of culture has been
born with elementary mental supported in cross-cultural research e.g
functions such as perceptions and Gredler (1992) pointed to the primitive
memory. These then become higher counting system used in Papua New Guinea
mental functions through the as an example of how culture can limit
influence of culture, this function is cognitive development. This supports
The zone of proximal a biological format of natural Vygotsky’s view that cultural influences are
development is the development. key for cognitive development and can
region between a explain cultural differences in learning.
