Nativist Vs. Constructivist

Nativist Vs. Constructivist

1. According to Nativist explanations, we are born with innate cognitive structures which determine cognitive ability.

   • Any developmental changes simply reflect genetic predispositions.
   • In the 1960s and 1970s most nativist research focused in language and perception.
     • Chomsky (1965) proposed that we are born with an innate ability to use and understand language.
       • He pointed out that when young children are exposed to the language of their culture they internalise the grammatical rules of the language without explicit instruction.
         • He therefore concluded that we are born with some kind of innate grammar device - he called it a Language Acquisition Device (LAD), which enables the capacity to learn language.
     • Perception research in the 1970s revealed that certain perceptual abilities - for example, depth perception - seem to be present very early in infancy.
       • In a study by Bower et al. (1970) infants aged 6-21 days were positioned facing an object suspended in front of them at a distance. The object was released from the start position and 'loomed' towards the infants' faces. As the object loomed closer, babies made a typical 'collision' response, pulling their heads upwards and away from the approaching object in an attempt to avoid collision.
         • The researchers concluded that infants can perceive depth at just a few days old. So, this study appears to support a nativist explanation, that nature endows us with certain cognitive abilities, such as depth perception.

2. Nativist explanations apparently conflict with Piaget's views.

   • Piaget proposed that the newborn infant's cognitive ability consisted of basic organising principles of assimilation and accommodation and that, thereafter, cognitive development occurred as a result of the child's active experience in the environment.
     • Piaget's theory is a constructivist theory as he states that knowledge is constructed through experiences.
       • According to nativist explanations, newborn infants are innately equipped with certain cognitive abilities and Piaget therefore underestimated young children's understanding of the physical world.

3. Baillargeon's Work.

   • Baillargeon developed new techniques that enabled her to challenge Piaget's views about the age at which infants develop object permanence.
     • In a series of ingenious experiments she used a procedure in which infants are familiarised with a visual event sequence and then presented with a test event that either violates the expected sequence or conforms to the expected sequence.
       • Infant's reactions to the test event are observed. If the test event does violate the expected sequence and the child shows surprise we can infer that the infant has a mental representation of the expected sequence.
         • In other words, they have object permanence.
   • RESEARCH CARD: Baillargeon (1986).
   • RESEARCH CARD: Baillargeon and DeVos (1991).
   • EVALUATIONS.
     • Baillargeon's research presents a challenge to Piaget's findings on object permanence and his theory that the child's knowledge is constructed through experience.
     • Although the infants in Baillargeon's experiments demonstrate quite sophisticated understanding of object permanence, they are not as competent when tested on their understanding of other aspects of the physical world, such as gravity and how objects can support other objects.