Hockenbury Discovering Psychology 5th txtbk

Development During Infancy and Childhood391Table 9.2Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive DevelopmentStage Characteristics of the Stage Major Change of the StageSensorimotor Acquires understanding of object Development proceeds from(0–2 years) permanence. First understandings reflexes to active use of sensoryof cause-and-effect relationships. and motor skills to explore theenvironment.Preoperational Symbolic thought emerges. Development proceeds from(2–7 years) Language development occurs understanding simple cause-(2–4 years). Thought and and-effect relationships tolanguage both tend to beprelogical thought processesegocentric. Cannot solveinvolving the use of imaginaconservationproblems.tion and symbols to representobjects, actions, and situations.Concrete operations Reversibility attained. Can solve Development proceeds from(7–11 years) conservation problems. Logical prelogical thought to logicalthought develops and is applied solutions to concrete problems.to concrete problems. Cannotsolve complex verbal problemsand hypothetical problems.Formal operations Logically solves all types of Development proceeds from(adolescence problems. Thinks scientifically. logical solving of concretethrough adulthood) Solves complex verbal and hypo- problems to logical solving ofthetical problems. Is able to think all classes of problems, includinabstract terms.ing abstract problems.conservationIn Piaget’s theory, the understanding thattwo equal quantities remain equal eventhough the form or appearance is rearranged,as long as nothing is added orsubtracted.concrete operational stageIn Piaget’s theory, the third stage of cognitivedevelopment, which lasts from aboutage 7 to adolescence; characterized by theability to think logically about concreteobjects and situations.formal operational stageIn Piaget’s theory, the fourth stage of cognitivedevelopment, which lasts from adolescencethrough adulthood; characterized bythe ability to think logically about abstractprinciples and hypothetical situations.with abstract ideas in one domain of knowledge, his thinking may not reflect thesame degree of sophistication in other areas. Piaget (1973) acknowledged that evenamong many adults, formal operational thinking is often limited to areas in whichthey have developed expertise or a special interest.Table 9.2 summarizes Piaget’s stages of cognitive development.Criticisms of Piaget’s TheoryPiaget’s theory has inspired hundreds of research studies (Kessen, 1996). Generally,scientific research has supported Piaget’s most fundamental idea: that infants, youngchildren, and older children use distinctly different cognitive abilities to constructtheir understanding of the world. However, other aspects of Piaget’s theory havebeen challenged.Criticism 1: Piaget underestimated the cognitive abilities of infants andyoung children. To test for object permanence, Piaget would show the infant anobject, cover it with a cloth, and then observe whether the infant tried to reachunder the cloth for the object. Obviously, such a response requires the infant tohave a certain level of motor skill development. Using this procedure, Piaget foundthat it wasn’t until an infant was about 9 months old that she behaved as if sheunderstood that an object continued to exist after it was hidden. Even at this age,Piaget maintained, an infant’s understanding of object permanence was immatureand would not be fully developed for another year or so.But what if the infant “knew” that the object was under the cloth but simplylacked the physical coordination to reach for it? How could you test this hypothesis?Rather than using manual tasks to assess object permanence and other cognitiveabilities, psychologist Renée Baillargeon has used visual tasks. Baillargeon’s researchis based on the premise that infants, like adults, will look longer at “surprising”events that appear to contradict their understanding of the world.In this research paradigm, the infant first watches an expected event, which is consistentwith the understanding that is being tested. Then, the infant is shown anunexpected event. If the unexpected event violates the infant’s understanding ofphysical principles, he should be surprised and look longer at the unexpected eventthan the expected event.As researchers continue to makeprogress in understanding how infantsattain and use their physical knowledge,we come closer to unveiling the complexarchitecture that makes it possible forthem to learn, so very rapidly, aboutthe world around them.RENÉE BAILLARGEON (2004)