Cognitive development

After studying this topic you should be able to:

• outline and evaluate Piaget’s theory of cognitive development
• outline and evaluate Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development
• discuss the empirical evidence related to both theories
• describe and evaluate practical applications of these theories

Piaget’s theory of cognitive development
Cognitive development is the study of how mental activities develop.
The essence of this theory of cognitive development is as follows:

• There are qualitative differences between child and adult thinking. Before Piaget the view was that children simply knew less than adults and cognitive development involved quantitative changes.
• It is a biological approach: cognitive development is mainly a consequence of physical maturation. Progress occurs only when the child is ready and then appropriate experiences will enable cognitive development to occur.
• Language is the outcome of a generalised cognitive ability. Language does not create cognitive development, it is the result of general cognitive maturity.

The structure of the intellect
Variant cognitive structures develop with age:

• Schemas (or schemata) are cognitive representations of things or activities. A child is born with innate schema. These are reflex responses, such as grasping schema or sucking schema. These schema integrate with each other, and new ones form in response to the environment.
• Operations are things that involve physical or symbolic manipulations (as in pre-operational thought)

Invariant cognitive structures: The process of adaptation (learning) remains the same through life:

• Assimilation. A new object or idea is understood in terms of existing schema. For example, you see a furry thing and realise that it is a dog. You have understood the new experience in terms of existing schema.
• Accommodation. Schema are modified to fit new situations or information. For example, you realise the furry thing is not a dog nor does it belong to any other group of animal with which you were familiar. It is in fact a llama and you must modify your existing schemas to cope with this new information.
• Equilibrium. If existing schema are inadequate, a state of disequilibrium occurs, and this drives the person to accommodate the schema – thus ensuring cognitive development.

NOTE: Piaget’s theory is sometimes called an ‘ages and stages theory’ because of the concept of stages. However, the structure of the intellect and the way development takes place (through disequilibrium and accommodation) is just as important.

Stages in cognitive development
A child moves from one stage to the next as a consequence of maturity. Horizontal décalage describes the fact that not all aspects of the same stage appear at the same time – for example, the ability to conserve number and volume.

• Sensorimotor stage (0 to approximately 2 years). Early reflex activities (e.g. sucking) are built up into more complex routines through circular (repetitive) reactions. The infant co-ordinates sensory and motor activity. By the end of this stage symbolic activity has started (e.g. language)
• Pre-operational stage (2–7 years). Using symbols but not adult logic (i.e. logic that is internally consistent). Pre-operational children use transductive reasoning (logic which is centred on one particular aspect of a thing and therefore cannot be transferred to other situations), e.g. ‘if a thing has four legs and a dog has four legs, the thing must be a dog’.

The stage is subdivided into:

• Pre-conceptual (2–4 years). Concepts not fully formed, e.g. Daddy owns ablue car – therefore all blue cars are called ‘Daddy’s car’.
• Intuitive (4–7 years) e.g. child displays animism, egocentric behaviour (as inthe three mountains experiment ), and cannot conserve.

• Concrete operational stage (7–11 years). Children now use logical mental rules, but only for concrete rather than abstract tasks, e.g. they cannot cope with the transitive interference task problem ‘Mary is taller than Susan, Susan is taller than Anne, who is tallest?’ unless the problem is presented using dolls (i.e. in concrete form). The child can cope with conservation, class inclusion, and using numbers to perform calculations. However, problem solving still tends to be random rather than systematic (scientific).
• Formal operational stage (11+ years). Abstract and systematic thought possible, organised deduction/induction, more scientific approach.

Empirical evidence
Piaget’s methods involved naturalistic observation and semi-structured interviews, using small samples of (often) his own children. However, he did spend over 50 years amassing a detailed record of individual behaviour (idiographic approach).
Piaget also conducted research with Inhelder of a more experimental nature, which did involve large samples of children. Piaget’s research led him to several conclusions, as outlined below.

Object permanence (sensorimotor stage)
This refers to a child’s realisation that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be seen. Piaget claimed that this developed after the age of 8 months.

• However, Baillargeon and DeVos (1991) showed that infants aged 3–4 months demonstrated object permanence when tested on various tasks. In the rolling car task (see below) there was a large or small carrot sliding along a track and hidden at one point by a screen with a large window. The track is arranged so that the large carrot should be visible as it passes behind the window whereas the small carrot (not as broad) should remain hidden. The infants looked longer at the large carrot presumably expecting the top half to be visible behind the window.
• It would seem that children develop object permanence before the age suggested by Piaget but that it is still a developmental stage.

Egocentrism (intuitive pre-operational stage)
Pre-operational children find it hard to take the perspective of another.

• In the three mountains experiment Piaget and Inhelder (1956) asked children aged 4–12 to say how a doll, placed in various positions, would view a model of a mountain range (see diagram). The youngest children could only work from their own perspective, but by the age of nine they were sure of the doll’s perspective.
• However, Hughes (1975) achieved better performance by hiding a doll from a toy policeman and Borke (1975) used the character Grover from Sesame Street driving along in his fire engine, again finding that younger children were not as egocentric as Piaget suggested.

Conservation (intuitive, pre-operational stage)
This refers to the ability to understand that quantity is not changed even when a display is transformed.

• In the number conservation experiment, Piaget showed a child two identical rows of counters and asked whether they were both the same. He then madeone row longer by moving the counters in it further apart and again asked whether they were the same. A child over 7 (concrete operational stage) recognises that quantity can not change and says ‘yes’. Similar experiments were done with volume (water in a jar) and mass (balls of clay).
•  Rose and Blank (1974) and Samuel and Bryant (1984 ) found that using two questions confuses younger children. If one question was askedyounger children performed better, but there were still age differences.
• McGarrigle and Donaldson (1974) found that a less artificial task led to success at a younger age. They used ‘naughty teddy’ to rearrange a row of counters. However, subsequent research (Moore and Frye, 1986) has suggested that the naughty teddy may have unduly distracted the children and they didn’t realise that any transformation had taken place and that’s why they were not ‘fooled’by the transformation.

Formal operational thinking

• Bryant and Trabasso (1971) showed that difficulty on transitive inference tasks may be due to memory failure rather than lack of ability. They trained children until they could perform a transitive task successfully, and found that they could then perform a more lengthy series of comparisons.
• Piaget and Inhelder (1956) tested deductive reasoning using the beaker problem. Children are given four beakers of colourless, odourless liquid and asked to find which combination turns yellow. They found that concrete  thinkers try to solve the problem randomly whereas formal thinkers are systematic.

The influence of language on thought
Sinclair-de-Zwart (1969) produced evidence that the inability to conserve was related to linguistic development (i.e. children who could conserve had more extensive vocabularies using words such as ‘larger’ instead of absolute terms such as ‘big’). However, training in verbal skills did not increase the ability to conserve (i.e. teaching the children to use other words for ‘small’ such as ‘short’, ‘thin’ or ‘few’). 90% of the non-conservers remained unable to conserve, which supports the view that children only move from one stage to the next when they are ready – not when given extra practice.

PROGRESS CHECK

Criticisms of Piaget’s theory and the empirical evidence

• Age. Many studies have found that children develop certain cognitive structures earlier (or later) than Piaget claimed but the stage sequence remains unchallenged by this evidence.
• Appropriateness of the task. Piaget’s tasks may have confused children, e.g. the three mountains task.
• Form of questioning. Children aim to please and so they respond to demand characteristics and/or experimenter bias, e.g. the conservation experiment.
• Practice. If the development of cognitive structures is related to maturity then practice should not improve performance. Danner and Day (1977) coached students aged 10, 13 and 17 in three formal operational tasks. The effects were limited with the younger participants but very marked at 17 years, showing that training does make a  difference although it is still related to cognitive maturation.
• Effects of language. Frank (1966) claimed that language can help overcome concrete thinking. He tested 4–6-year-olds on the volume conservation task with a screen in front of the beakers so the level was not visible. Almost all the older children coped, and half the 4-year-olds. However, Sinclair-de-Zwart  did not find that language training led to improved performance.

Evaluation
The strengths of Piaget’s theory are as follows:

• Piaget’s theory was the first comprehensive account of cognitive development.
• It changed the traditional view of the child as passive and stimulated an enormous amount of research.
• It had a large impact on education, particularly in primary schools.

Weaknesses of Piaget’s theory have been identified as follows:

• Piaget’s evidence often lacked scientific rigour. The samples were small and open to experimenter bias. Bryant (1995) claimed that Piaget’s experiments lacked control (which means that he did not rule out other possible explanations for the behaviours he observed).
• Piaget suggested that disequilibrium would be the driving force in cognitive development. However, although conflict would create a sense that something is wrong it does not tell a child how to solve the problem.

Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development
The essence of his theory is as follows.

• Cognitive development is the result of the child’s active construction of their knowledge rather than passive conditioning (Pavlov’s view).
• The social construction of knowledge: Social and cultural influences, especially language and other cultural symbols (e.g. mathematics), are the driving force behind cognitive development. Vygotsky’s theory grew out of the political world he lived in (Marxist Russia) which believed that the only way to bring about psychological change was by altering social conditions.
• The guidance of experts (people with greater knowledge) is the main reason why children move forward in their thinking (as opposed to Piaget’s notion of biological readiness).
• The role of scaffolding  in constructing a framework to promote effective learning.

The structure of the intellect

• Elementary mental functions: these are innate capacities (such as attention and sensation) that will develop to a limited extent through experience. This kind of thinking is not dissimilar to that of other primates.
• Higher mental functions. In the main it is cultural influences that are responsible for transforming elementary functions into higher mental functions, such as problem solving and thinking. Culture is transmitted via language, shared symbol systems such as mathematics, and the help of ‘experts’.
• The zone of proximal development (ZPD) is the distance between a child’s current and potential abilities. The aim of instruction is to stimulate those functions which lie waiting in the ZPD.

Stages in cognitive development
Vygotsky’s theory was not a stage theory in the same way that Piaget’s was, nevertheless he did identify certain phases of development:

• Pre-intellectual, social speech (age 0–3 years). Language serves a social function. At the same time, thought is pre-linguistic.
• Egocentric speech (3–7 years). Language is used to control one’s own behaviour but often spoken aloud.
• Inner speech (7+ years). Self-talk becomes silent and differs in form from social speech. Throughout life, language serves these dual purposes – for thought and social communication.

Empirical evidence

• Gredler (1992) argued that if higher mental functions depend on cultural influences, we would expect to find different higher mental functions in different cultures. One example of this can be seen in the children of Papua New Guinea who are taught a counting system which begins on the thumb of one hand and proceeds up the arm and down to the other fingers, ending at 29 (which means that it is very difficult for them to add and subtract).

• Shif (Vygotsky, 1987) asked pupils to complete sentences which ended in‘because’ or ‘although’ and found that they were better able to finish the sentences which dealt with scientific rather than everyday concepts. Vygotsky argued that this demonstrates a greater understanding of scientific concepts –because these are learned through instruction with expert guidance, whereas everyday concepts are assimilated through self-directed activity.

• Freund (1990) arranged for one group of children to play on their own with a doll’s house, and another to play with their mothers. At the end, the children who worked with experts (mothers) showed a dramatic improvement in their
  ability to perform a furniture sorting task.

An evaluation of Vygotsky’s theory

• Vygotsky’s approach has produced comparatively little empirical support (so far), but lots of interest from psychologists and educationalists.
• The central role of language and culture in cognitive development has important implications for education.

NOTE: Piaget and Vygotsky need not be seen as opposites. Glassman (1999) argues that in fact the two theories are
remarkably similar, especially at their central core. An attempt to integrate the two approaches would be productive.

Practical applications to education

Piaget’s theory

• Readiness. Children advance their knowledge because of biologically regulated cognitive changes. Children should be offered stimuli which are moderately novel only when they are ready.
• Self-discovery and self-motivation. If you tell a child how to do something you prevent their complete understanding.
• Individualised. Since each child matures at a different rate and has different schema, their learning programme should be unique.
• Discovery learning. The teacher should set tasks which are appropriate for pupils and intrinsically motivating. The teacher’s role is not to impart knowledge but to ask questions or create situations which ‘ask questions’, thus creating disequilibrium and forcing children to make accommodations.
• Logic is not an innate mental process, it is the outcome of cognitive development. Logic, maths and science should be taught in primary schools.
•  Use of concrete materials in teaching children, in the stage of concreteoperations.

NOTE: Piaget quote 'Each time one prematurely teaches a child something he could have discovered for himself, that child is kept from inventing it and consequently from understanding it completely’ (Piaget, 1970).

Vygotsky’s theory

• Expert intervention (by peers or adults) should be most effective when the expert is aware of the limits of the ZPD. Thus, the more sensitive an adult is to a child’s competence the more the child should improve.
• Scaffolding. An adult advances children’s thinking by providing a framework (scaffolding) on which children can climb. Wood et al. (1976) observed mothers and children (aged 4–5 years) working together. When the learner ran into difficulty, the mothers gave specific instructions. When the learner is coping well only general encouragement is needed. The learner is given a scaffold by those more expert and the scaffold enables them to ‘climb higher’ i.e. achieve more. In time, we all learn to scaffold ourselves (self-instruction).
• Peer tutoring. Peers can also be experts and co-operative group work successful in schools. Bennett and Dunne (1991) found that children who were engaged in co-operative group work were less competitive, less concerned with status and more likely to show evidence of logical thinking than those who worked alone.

NOTE: Vygotksy quote:  ‘What a child can do  with assistance today he/she can do by him/herself tomorrow’ (Vygotksy)

PROGRESS CHECK