Cognition & Development p2

Cognition & Development p2

1. (BG) Baillargeon's explanation of cognitive abilities

   • Infants identify event categories. Each event category corresponds to one way in which objects interact and children learn about these from birth. An innate PRS means that when a infant is shown an impossible occurence (tall rabbit event in which rabbit's ears does not appear in gap), it draws their attention. This helps them to devlop their understanding of the physical world.
     • Baillargeon suggested that infants in the sensorimotor stage may have better developed understanding of the physical world proposed by piaget. Piaget suggested that infants did not reach for a hidden object because they lacked an understanding of object permeanance. BG suggested it occured becaus ethey didn't have the necessary motor skills.
       • BG considered that the methods used by Piaget led him to underestimate children's abilities. She developed the VIOLATION OF EXPECTATION (VOE) technique to [compare infant reactions to an expected and unexpected event] so we are able to make inferences about an infant's cognitive ability.
         • BG et al proposed that we are born with a PHYSICAL REASONING SYSTEM (PRS) to enable us to learn details of the physical world more easily. This primitive awareness becomes more sophisticated as we learn from experience. BG referred to object persistance (similiar to Piaget's object permeanance) and claimed this was one such ability.
       • C&G SOCIAL COGNITION
         • Theory of mind (ToM)
           • ToM is not a theory like 'Piaget's' but a personal theory or belief about what other people know, are feeling or thinking. tested via diff methods depending on age.
             • MELTZOFF allowed children to observe adults placing beads in a jar ||Experimental condition: adults appeared to struggle with this and dropped the beads || Control condition: Adults successfully placed the beads in the jar|| In both conditions the children successfully placed the beads in the jar suggesting that they were imitating what the adults intended to do rather than what actually happened (struggled) - demonstrating ToM
               • Children were told a story involving Sally & Anne: Sally places a marble in her basket -Sally leaves the room - Anne moves the basket to her box - Sally returns - Where does Sally look for her marble?
                 • In order to understand that Sally didn't know that Anne has moved the marble, you need an understanding of Sally's false belief about where it is.
                   • Baron-cohen et al used the Sally Anne task to test 20 high - functioning children diagnosed with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD) - a cont group of 14 kids with downs syndrome and 27 children without a diagnosis||85% of children in the cont group correctly identified where sally would look for her marble but only 20% of the ASD group - suggests ASD involves a ToM defcit
                     • Older children with ASD can succeed on false belief tasks despite problems with empathy, social communication etc. This questions whether ASD can be explained using a ToM deficit. Baron-cohen et al developed the EYES TASK as a more challenging test of ToM adults with high functioning ASD struggled. This supports the idea that ToM deficits may = ASD
                       • E:- It's difficult to distinguish ToM from perspective taking as it is suggested that many of the methods used to study ToM (including the Sally-Anne task) could actually be measures of perspective taking. In addition, researchers suggest perspective taking tasks are also able to distinguish between ASD children and others. If ToM is basically the same as perspective taking then the concept lacks any usefulness
                         • E: + One strength is the application to understanding ASD. ToM research has been useful in helping us understand the differing experiences of people with ASD. Baron-Cohen event suggests that ASD is a DIRECT result of ToM. Another researcher reports that recent research does not support that ToM problems are specific to ASD and that all people with ASD have ToM deficits. Means that ASD and ToM may not be as closely linked as once thought. ToM may only be a partial explanation for ASD
                         • E:- The validity of the Eyes task is questioned because looking at a static pair of eyes is different from real life experiences of seeing a face of a dynamic interaction. As such, conclusions about ToM that result from the use of the task lacks validity. This suggests that the eye task is not valid or a realistic measure of ToM and questions the conclusions about ASD
     • VOE experiment: P: 24 infants aged 5-6M were shown a 2 rabbits (1tall,1short) passing behind a screen with a window. In the possible condition: Tall rabbit can be seen passing but the short one cannot | Impossible condition: Neither rabbit appeared in the screen.
       • F: The infants showed attention for 33 seconds (imp condition) compared to 25 second in the possible condition. This is interpreted that the kids were surprised at the imp condition. Possibly because ethey knew the rabbit should have appeared in the window. Demonstartes object permeanace at less that 6M of age.
       • E: + VOE techniques provides a better understanding of infants as Piaget assumed that when an infant failed to search for a hidden object, the infant thought it no longer existed. Another interpretation would be that they were simply losing interest- the use of VOE techniques allows us to control this possibility.
         • E: - VOE assumes behavioural responses indicate understanding as Piaget distinguished between understanding and acting in accordance with a principle. Looking longer, even if it is because impossible, it is not the same as reasoning about the physical world. Suggests Piaget and BG are considering 2 diff processes. Therefore, BG's conc are not actually a criticism of Piaget's conc.
           • E: - It is hard to judge what an infant understands. Using the VOE technique we are predicting how a baby might behave if a VOE occurred. However, they might not actually look longer at impossible events than possible events. Additionally, infants might look for diff lengths of time just because they see them as diff not because they recognised them as possible. Raises validity of the VOE for investigating infant understanding.

2. The mirror neuron system (social cognition)

   • Ramachandran suggested that mirror neurons have shaped human evolution in particular how we evolved as a social species. Mirror neurons enable us to understand intention, emotion and perspective. These are fundamental requirements for living in large groups with the complex social roles and rules that characterise human beh
     • It has also been suggested that mirror neurons play an important role in perspective taking and ToM. Mirror neurons can fire in response to others actions and this underlies ToM
       • Gallese & Goldman suggested that mirror neurons respond not just to observed actions but to intentions behind beh. We need to understand the intention of others in order to interact socially. Research on mirror neurons suggests we actually simulate the action of others in our own brains and thus experience their inner intentions through our mirror neurons
         • Rizolatti noted that the same area of the monkey's cortex became activated when: * Monkey's observed a researcher reaching for his lunch ||* The monkey itself reached for the food. The researcher confirmed that the same brain cells fired.
           • Mirror neurons: Respond to motor activity of others
           • ASD is associated with problems related to social-cognitive abilities such as difficulty with perspective taking, understanding intention, emotion and ToM. It follows that people with ASD might have a poor mirror neuron system.
             • Ramachandran and Oberman have proposed the 'BROKEN MIRROR' theory of ASD. According to this, ASD develops due to neurological deficits, including dysfunction in the mirro neuron system. Such dysfunction prevents a child imitating and understanding social behaviours in others. Researchers have observed that in infancy, children who are later diagnosed with ASD typically mimic adult behaviour less than children with no diagnosis. This may demonstrate innate problems with the mirro neuron system.
             • E: + One strength is that there is research support for mirror neurons. A researcher demonstrated via FMRI scans that the Brodman's area (brain area with rich mirror neurons) is involved in contagious yawning (a simple example of human empathy) The study supports the importance of mirror neurons in social cognition showing that regions of the brain believed to be rich in mirror neurons activate when empathy or perspective taking, take place.
               • E:- One limitation is the difficulties involved in studying the system in humans. Evidence for mirror neuron activity usually comes from brain scanning. This technique identifies activity levels in regions of the brain but cannot measure activity individual brain cells. Inserting electrodes is the only way of measuring activity at a cellular level and it not ethically possible in humans. Mirror neuron research is therefore based on inferences measuring general activity in areas of the brain and such cannot provide direct evidence of mirror neuron activity.
                 • E:- There is mixed evidence for the link with ASD. Hdjikhani supports the link between ASD and mirror neuron deficits by finding a smaller thickness of the pars opercularis (brain area) in ASD pps. Other studies using FMRI have shown lower activity in brain areas associated with mirror neurons in pps with ASD. Though, not all such findings have been replicated so the reliability of the results remains questionable. consequently, the evidence linking ASD + mirror neurons is mixed.

Images and files in the map