Baillargeon’s Explanation of Early Infant Abilities (AQA A Level Psychology): Flashcards
Exam code: 7182
1/220Still learning
Know0
- FrontBaillargeon’s Theory
Baillargeon's theory of infant knowledge is a explanation of early infant abilities.
Was this flashcard helpful?
Cards in this collection (22)
Baillargeon's theory of infant knowledge is a explanation of early infant abilities.
Baillargeon's theory of infant knowledge is a nativist explanation of early infant abilities.
True or False?
Baillargeon agreed with Piaget that object permanence develops at eight months.
False.
Baillargeon assumed that infants have an inbuilt sense of object permanence, whereas Piaget thought it was acquired at around eight months.
Define physical reasoning system (PRS).
The physical reasoning system is an innate, primitive awareness of the physical properties of the world, proposed by Baillargeon et al. (2012). It becomes more sophisticated as infants learn from experience.
How does the PRS help infants develop an understanding of the physical world?
It predisposes infants to attend to events that violate physical laws, and this attention allows them to develop their understanding.
How did Baillargeon say infants' understanding of the physical world develops?
One event category at a time. For example, occlusion is understood very early, which is why even young infants can succeed in tasks involving hidden objects.
Define object persistence.
Object persistence is the understanding that an object still exists even when it is occluded by another object.
Describe the possible event in Baillargeon and DeVos (1991).
The short carrot moved behind a screen with a window cut into it and did not appear in the window, which makes sense because the carrot is shorter than the window.
In Baillargeon and DeVos (1991), the impossible event was the carrot failing to appear in the window.
In Baillargeon and DeVos (1991), the impossible event was the tall carrot failing to appear in the window.
What did Baillargeon and DeVos (1991) find?
4-month-old babies looked longer at the impossible event, suggesting they were surprised and had expected the tall carrot to appear in the window.
What did the Baillargeon and DeVos (1991) findings suggest infants understand?
That objects continue to exist when out of sight and that hidden objects have properties, such as height, that persist even when unseen.
Define violation of expectation (VOE).
Violation of expectation refers to events which defy logic and do not appear to be physically possible, such as a solid object being visible when obscured by another solid object.
True or False?
VOE research measures how long infants look at possible and impossible events.
True.
Infants' reactions to an impossible event are observed, and looking longer at it is taken as a sign of surprise.
What did Bower (1982) find?
Infants' heart rate increased when they were presented with an impossible event.
Wang et al. (2003) found 4-month-olds show VOE in hidden-object tasks even without the usual phase.
Wang et al. (2003) found 4-month-olds show VOE in hidden-object tasks even without the usual habituation phase.
What did Aguilar and Baillargeon (1999) find using a Minnie Mouse toy?
Infants stared longer at the low window condition (the impossible event) than the high window condition, as predicted by VOE.
Why is the VOE method a better test of infant understanding than Piaget's?
Piaget assumed a baby who looked away from a hidden object no longer knew it existed, but the baby may simply have lost interest. Losing interest cannot explain longer looking at impossible events, so VOE has better validity.
How do Hespos and van Marle (2012) support Baillargeon's theory?
Everyone shares a basic understanding of physical properties without learning, e.g. dropped keys fall. No cultural differences have been found, which suggests the PRS is innate.
Why might longer looking times not be a valid measure of infant understanding?
Infants may look longer at an event simply because they find it more interesting. Rivera et al. (1999) suggested a preference for movement could explain longer looking times.
Why is using infants as participants a limitation of Baillargeon's research?
A baby cannot be asked about their behaviour, so researchers must infer understanding from behaviour alone. Conclusions may reflect the researcher's assumptions as much as the infant's cognition.
Baillargeon's theory exemplifies the side of the nature vs nurture debate.
Baillargeon's theory exemplifies the nature side of the nature vs nurture debate.
True or False?
Baillargeon's theory takes an idiographic approach.
False.
It takes a nomothetic approach, aiming to establish universal laws such as the idea that all babies are born with a physical reasoning system.
How might Baillargeon's nomothetic approach limit her theory?
It may underestimate individual differences in infant experience and development, which an idiographic approach would focus on.
Sign up to unlock flashcards
or