Cognition and development
Piaget’s theory of cognitive development
Interactionist approach – maturation: the effects of biological processes on aging; effects
of the environment
Schema – (a cognitive framework we are all) born with basic motor schemas for grasping
and sucking and they grow with learning.
Motivation to learn – disequilibrium. This occurs when our existing schemata no longer
allows us to make sense of the world and disequilibrium is uncomfortable.
Assimilation – fitting new info into an existing schema
Accommodation – changing the existing schema/forming a new one.
Strengths
One strength is that there is evidence to support Piaget’s theory. Fantz showed that infants
as young as four das old showed a preference for a schematic face rather than the same
features all jumbled up. The unique configuration of the face is preferred rather than a
complex pattern. This supports his theory of basic motor schemas being innate which are
developed as the child learns. However, the findings are drawn from inference and
assumption that duration of time looking at a face is the same as preference.
Another strength of this theory is it has real world application. Piaget’s idea that children
learn actively by exploring their environment and forming their own mental representation
of the world has revolutionised classroom teaching. This led to the Plowden Report of 1967
saying that children should be given individual attention, only taught things they are capable
of learning and children mature at different rates. This suggests that Piaget’s theory has
useful application and has changed primary education to help children learn better.
Weaknesses
One weakness is the fact that Piaget overestimated how motivated children are to learn
which means that his theory may lack validity. Piaget only tested participants that were of a
similar background to himself, educated children from a middle class European background.
Such children may be more highly motivated than children from less educated backgrounds
and from different cultures. This means that his theory is ethnocentric and has cultural bias,
as formal operational thinking and abstract thinking may be less common in other social
groups.
Another weakness of the theory is that equilibration has been overplayed and
overemphasised. Equilibration is difficult to demonstrate. Inhelder did show that children’s
learning was helped when there was mid conflict between what they expected to happen
and what did happen but it was argued that this wasn’t really the sort of conflict that Piaget
was talking about. This is an issue because equilibrium is the motivation for cognitive
learning and if this is overemphasised then his whole theory is weakened.
Piaget’s intellectual stages
Object permanence – a child’s understanding that even if an object is no longer
visible, it still exists
Class inclusion – the relation between two classes where all members of one class
are included in the other
Egocentrism – seeing things from your own perspective and being unaware of other
possible povs.
, Conservatism – mathematical understanding that the quantity remains constant even
when the appearance of the object changes. The ability to distinguish between
appearance and reality.
Sensorimotor (0-2yrs) – understand object permanence at 8mths. This is why children
over 8mths old show less separation permanence. Focus on physical sensations.
Pre-operational stage (2-7yrs) – egocentric (3 mountains task), can’t comprehend class
inclusion (are there more dogs or animals?) can’t comprehend conservation.
Concrete operational stage (7-11) – perform better at egocentric and class inclusion
tasks, understand reversibility (4x2=2x4), no abstract ideas and can only reason on
physical objects in their presence.
Formal operational stage (11+) – formal logic, hypothetico-deductive reasoning, abstract
thinking. ‘All yellow cats have 2 heads; I have a yellow cat named Charlie – how many
heads does he have?’ ‘2’ – CO would be too distracted by the fact that cats don’t have
two heads.
Piaget intellectual development evaluation
One limitation is that Piaget’s methodology was flawed. The design may have confused
younger children in particular which may explain why they appeared less capable.
McGarrigle and Donaldson in the numbers conservation arranged for a ‘naughty teddy’ to
accidentally mess up the counters making one row longer. Young children coped better
because the change was explained by the naughty teddy’s behaviour, eliminating the
previous demand characteristic. Piaget’s method was flawed so it may be that children can
conserve objects earlier than originally suggested. Samuel and Bryant found that children
found the task easier when only one question was asked for all types of conservation tasks.
Piaget may have underestimated the abilities of younger children in egocentricity. In the
three mountains task, Hughes shoed that young children could cope with a task if it was
more realistic, for example using a naughty boy doll who was hiding from a policeman. This
means that children can take another’s perspective under more ‘real conditions. His method
was not actually testing egocentricity and so he may have underestimated the ability of the
children at the pre-operational stage and egocentrism as a concept in Piaget’s mind may be
flawed. Furthermore psychologists now believe that infants are capable of far more than
Piaget suggested – they are more rational and evidence suggests that these abilities are
innately driven, using the nativist approach.
Piaget’s theory may suffer from cultural bias. Piaget placed considerable value on the role of
logical operations in the development of thinking. This may be because he came from a
middle class European background and his studies involved children from similar
background who valued academic abilities. In other cultures and social classes, greater value
may be placed on a more basic level of concrete operations, therefore his theory is not
universally applicable. Ethnocentrism is the imposing of one’s own standards onto another
culture and Piaget’s theory can be considered ethnocentric, as his standards of cognitive
development will differ from that of another culture.
Piaget’s conclusions on class inclusion may be dubious. Siegler and Svetina study provided
evidence that children were capable of understanding class inclusion. They tested 5 yr olds
who undertook ten class inclusion tasks. After each task they received an explanation about
it. In one condition they were told that there must be more animals than dogs because there
Piaget’s theory of cognitive development
Interactionist approach – maturation: the effects of biological processes on aging; effects
of the environment
Schema – (a cognitive framework we are all) born with basic motor schemas for grasping
and sucking and they grow with learning.
Motivation to learn – disequilibrium. This occurs when our existing schemata no longer
allows us to make sense of the world and disequilibrium is uncomfortable.
Assimilation – fitting new info into an existing schema
Accommodation – changing the existing schema/forming a new one.
Strengths
One strength is that there is evidence to support Piaget’s theory. Fantz showed that infants
as young as four das old showed a preference for a schematic face rather than the same
features all jumbled up. The unique configuration of the face is preferred rather than a
complex pattern. This supports his theory of basic motor schemas being innate which are
developed as the child learns. However, the findings are drawn from inference and
assumption that duration of time looking at a face is the same as preference.
Another strength of this theory is it has real world application. Piaget’s idea that children
learn actively by exploring their environment and forming their own mental representation
of the world has revolutionised classroom teaching. This led to the Plowden Report of 1967
saying that children should be given individual attention, only taught things they are capable
of learning and children mature at different rates. This suggests that Piaget’s theory has
useful application and has changed primary education to help children learn better.
Weaknesses
One weakness is the fact that Piaget overestimated how motivated children are to learn
which means that his theory may lack validity. Piaget only tested participants that were of a
similar background to himself, educated children from a middle class European background.
Such children may be more highly motivated than children from less educated backgrounds
and from different cultures. This means that his theory is ethnocentric and has cultural bias,
as formal operational thinking and abstract thinking may be less common in other social
groups.
Another weakness of the theory is that equilibration has been overplayed and
overemphasised. Equilibration is difficult to demonstrate. Inhelder did show that children’s
learning was helped when there was mid conflict between what they expected to happen
and what did happen but it was argued that this wasn’t really the sort of conflict that Piaget
was talking about. This is an issue because equilibrium is the motivation for cognitive
learning and if this is overemphasised then his whole theory is weakened.
Piaget’s intellectual stages
Object permanence – a child’s understanding that even if an object is no longer
visible, it still exists
Class inclusion – the relation between two classes where all members of one class
are included in the other
Egocentrism – seeing things from your own perspective and being unaware of other
possible povs.
, Conservatism – mathematical understanding that the quantity remains constant even
when the appearance of the object changes. The ability to distinguish between
appearance and reality.
Sensorimotor (0-2yrs) – understand object permanence at 8mths. This is why children
over 8mths old show less separation permanence. Focus on physical sensations.
Pre-operational stage (2-7yrs) – egocentric (3 mountains task), can’t comprehend class
inclusion (are there more dogs or animals?) can’t comprehend conservation.
Concrete operational stage (7-11) – perform better at egocentric and class inclusion
tasks, understand reversibility (4x2=2x4), no abstract ideas and can only reason on
physical objects in their presence.
Formal operational stage (11+) – formal logic, hypothetico-deductive reasoning, abstract
thinking. ‘All yellow cats have 2 heads; I have a yellow cat named Charlie – how many
heads does he have?’ ‘2’ – CO would be too distracted by the fact that cats don’t have
two heads.
Piaget intellectual development evaluation
One limitation is that Piaget’s methodology was flawed. The design may have confused
younger children in particular which may explain why they appeared less capable.
McGarrigle and Donaldson in the numbers conservation arranged for a ‘naughty teddy’ to
accidentally mess up the counters making one row longer. Young children coped better
because the change was explained by the naughty teddy’s behaviour, eliminating the
previous demand characteristic. Piaget’s method was flawed so it may be that children can
conserve objects earlier than originally suggested. Samuel and Bryant found that children
found the task easier when only one question was asked for all types of conservation tasks.
Piaget may have underestimated the abilities of younger children in egocentricity. In the
three mountains task, Hughes shoed that young children could cope with a task if it was
more realistic, for example using a naughty boy doll who was hiding from a policeman. This
means that children can take another’s perspective under more ‘real conditions. His method
was not actually testing egocentricity and so he may have underestimated the ability of the
children at the pre-operational stage and egocentrism as a concept in Piaget’s mind may be
flawed. Furthermore psychologists now believe that infants are capable of far more than
Piaget suggested – they are more rational and evidence suggests that these abilities are
innately driven, using the nativist approach.
Piaget’s theory may suffer from cultural bias. Piaget placed considerable value on the role of
logical operations in the development of thinking. This may be because he came from a
middle class European background and his studies involved children from similar
background who valued academic abilities. In other cultures and social classes, greater value
may be placed on a more basic level of concrete operations, therefore his theory is not
universally applicable. Ethnocentrism is the imposing of one’s own standards onto another
culture and Piaget’s theory can be considered ethnocentric, as his standards of cognitive
development will differ from that of another culture.
Piaget’s conclusions on class inclusion may be dubious. Siegler and Svetina study provided
evidence that children were capable of understanding class inclusion. They tested 5 yr olds
who undertook ten class inclusion tasks. After each task they received an explanation about
it. In one condition they were told that there must be more animals than dogs because there
