GoConqr has a new look! Let us know what you think.

Sign up free

Flashcards

D&L TB8

Emily Hargreaves Psychology A-Level English 107 cards

D&L TB8

Cards in this deck (107)

  1. 1What is a Concept?• Philosophy: constituents of thought.
    • Cognitive Psychology: general ideas that allow us to organize objects, events, etc. on the basis of some similarity.
    • Nativist – individuals are born with at least some conceptual knowledge
  2. 2Categorization and categorical structureCategorization
    • We can learn a lot about conceptual development by looking at how infants categorize the world.
    Category Structure
    • Hierarchical structure – different categories nested within each other
    • Prototypicality – sharing traits
    • Abstraction – creating the prototypical category by abstracting out traits
  3. 3How does this hierarchy develop?• We acquire more superordinate level categories first, then get smaller
    - Super-ordinate classes --> Basic classes
    --> Sub-ordinate classes
  4. 4Distinguishing between basic categories• Infants attend less to familiar item
    • Ability to form basic level categories for cats and dogs
    • Form categories for animals they haven’t seen before – on the basis on perceptual input
  5. 5Empiricist Account:• Infants form categories using perceptual info
    • Can young infants (3 mos.) use geometric form to create categories?
    • Infants form multiple abstract concepts and novel categories at the same time based on perceptual input alone
  6. 6Using Perceptual Cues• Infants use many types of perceptual cues to form categories:
    o Basic Visual Features: shape, colour, size, etc.
    o Higher Level Visual Features: spatial configuration, head/leg configurations
    o Auditory Cues: voice, phonetic information, animal sounds
    o Other Perceptual Cues: touch / texture
    - Infants pay more attention to novel shapes in a familiarisation task
  7. 7But while perceptual cues are helpful, they don’t fully explain behaviour…• Children (aged 2-3) weight perceptual cues differently for different types of objects:
    o Colour important for food.
    o Shape important for toys
    • Many concepts have no obvious perceptual cue:
    o Knowledge of Living Things
    o Knowledge of Other People/Self (ToM)
    o Knowledge of Biological Processes
    o Knowledge of Causality
  8. 8Perceptual Cues vs. Living Things• Infants notice:
    • a novel item from a familiar category (small novelty effect)
    • a novel category
    (large novelty effect)
    • But, this could be based only on perceptual differences between animals and furniture
    • Animals and furniture have different legs, textures, etc.
    o Last habituation trial – explored animal 5-6 seconds
    o Familiar test – increased to around 7 seconds
    o Novel test – around 8-9 seconds
  9. 9Habituation vs. Familiar items• For both animals and furniture, infants notice the difference between habituation test and familiar items
    • Also explore more in novel test
    • Even though the artificial-looking animals and furniture look very similar
    • Suggests that perceptual similarity isn’t the only basis for category formation
    • Also suggests that by 11 months infants already have a concept of “living things”
  10. 10How do infants learn conceptual information? Empiricist Perspective• Infants first experience the world (sight, sound, touch) as a consequence of reflex actions (eg, grasping)
    • Evidence: infants search for hidden objects in surprising ways
    o Hidden objects: (0-8 months)
    No search for hidden objects (objects don’t exist outside of being
    perceived)
    o The A not B error: (8-12 months)
    Searching for moved objects in their original location
    o Invisible displacement: (12-18 months)
    Don’t track objects that change locations out of sight
    o Full object permanence / tracking: (18-24 months)
     Invisible displacement: e.g. moving a box with an object inside
     Infants will still search first location for hidden object
  11. 11• Idea: unimodal perceptual input built up into more complex concepts of objects• May suggest that infant’s object concepts are very different from adults’ object concepts
    o Infants: unimodal (“dogs” have a shape)
    o Adults: multi-modal (“dogs” have a shape and a sound)
    • But, there is evidence that very young infants do combine different sensory modalities
  12. 12Constraints on the empiricist perspective• Evidence that neonates can combine different modalities of perception (eg. vision, hearing)
    o Abilities not likely based on experience, as infants are so young
    • 75% of infants looked longer at the pacifier that they thought they felt in their mouths
    • Neonates can imitate facial expressions
  13. 13• There is also good evidence that infants do actually have representations of things they cannot see.o 7months of age
     Infants habituated to a flap like a book – opens out onto the table
     Object placed
     Flap opens and hides object
     Flap opens all the way down to the table – IMPOSSIBLE EVENT – infants more surprised by this – object should not disappear/flap should not open
  14. 14Nativist Perspective • Initial state is already populated with some core knowledge (i.e., unlearned conceptual knowledge)o Knowledge about objects
     Cohesion, continuity, contact
    o Knowledge about actions
     Goal directedness, efficiency, contingency, reciprocity
    o Knowledge about number
     Ratio, addition, modality independent
    o Knowledge about geometry
     Distances, angles, differences between surfaces (eg, walls)
  15. 15Core Object Knowledge• Core system of object representation, centered on a set of expectations about how objects move.
    o Cohesion: Objects move as connected and bounded wholes.
    o Continuity: Objects move on connected, unobstructed paths.
    o Contact: Objects influence each other through contact.
  16. 16• Core Object Knowledge: Cohesion Things that move together are part of the same object.
    o Red bars move in sync on opposite sides of the blue bar
    o Infants look longer at broken bar – more surprised? They understand that features which seem to move together are the same object - cohesion
  17. 17Core Object Knowledge: Continuity• Objects move on connected paths, cannot move through each other.
    • Understand that objects have consistent paths and don’t pass through each other
  18. 18Core Action Knowledge• 3 month-old infants habituated to animals or vehicles
    Either static photos, or moving point-light displays
    o Infants understand that animals and vehicles can be categorised visually, but also on the vision of the motion of the objects
  19. 19Core Action Knowledge: Efficiency/Goal Directedness• 14 month-olds watched an adult turn on a light by touching it with their forehead
    • If the adult’s hands were free, infants imitated using their forehead
    • If the adult’s hands were occupied, infants imitated using their hands
    o Infants realise that the adults actions are the most efficient way to realise their goals
  20. 20Core Number Knowledge• Two-day-old infants who had heard 16 sounds looked longer at 16 objects.
    • And, when they had heard only 4 sounds they looked longer at 4 objects.
  21. 21Core Geometrical Knowledge• Infants still able to find objects after being disorientated (blindfolded and spun around)
    • Use knowledge such as lengths of walls and room geometry
  22. 22Constraints on the nativist perspective• What is really innate?
    o How can we measure what is innate?
    • How does perceptual experience change or shape innate categories?
    • How have innate concepts evolved?
    o What is their function? How do they help us?
    o Why would they emerge when and how they do?
  23. 23How does language affect category formation?• Study 1: Use of Verbal Labels
    o Semantic information
    • Study 2: Use of Grammatical Structure
    o Syntactic information
    • Traits vary across different individual animals
    • Combination of traits coded by number at bottom of image
    • Narrow set – 2 different subgroupings of animals (1s+2s or 4s+5s)
    • Broad set – no natural clustering, traits jumbled together. Prototype formed from the group as a whole (3333 formed as an average of all traits)
  24. 24How does language affect categories? Results• Exp. 1: Habituate to Broad Set: establish that 1 category is seen.
    • Exp. 2: Habituate to Narrow Set: establish that 2 categories are seen.
    • Exp. 3: Habituate to Narrow Set with two CONSISTENT category labels: consistent verbal labels have no effect on categorization by visual information.
    • Exp. 4: Habituate to Narrow Set with two INCONSISTENT category labels: inconsistent verbal labels UNDERMINE categorization by visual information.
    • Exp. 5: Habituate to Narrow Set with one label: “inconsistent” labels are fine if they can be interpreted as consistent information about one superordinate category.
    SYNTACTIC AND SEMANTIC INFORMATION IS IMPORTANT
  25. 25Infants use syntax to inform category structure • Experiment 1: Nouns and Superordinate Classes• Experiment 1: Nouns and Superordinate Classes
    • Children then gave each of the following photos to one of the dolls
    • Children in the NOUN condition are more accurate
    • They are better at giving the photos of animals, clothing, and food to the correct doll.
    • Suggests that nouns are intuitively associated with more-superordinate classes (dogs, birds, fish).
    o Noun condition infants more accurate
    o Adjectives impede the ability to categorise
  26. 26Infants use syntax to inform category structure • Experiment 2: Adjectives and Subordinate Classes• Children then gave each of the following photos to one of the dolls:
    • Children in the ADJECTIVE condition are more accurate
    • They are better at giving the photos of Collies, Setters, and Terriers to the correct doll.
    • Suggests that adjectives are intuitively associated with more-subordinate classes (collies, setters, terriers).
    • Adjectives are better associated with subordinate categories
  27. 27Information Processing Frameworks • Describe the flow of information through a cognitive system. • Basic Assumptions of the Information Processing Perspective:o There is a limit to how much information we can process at once.
    o We have machinery for bringing information in (i.e. Input)
    For example, mechanisms of perception
    o We have machinery for processing information
    For example: attention, working memory, executive control
    o This processed information is then used for something (i.e. Output)
    • Cognitive Architecture / Cognitive System
  28. 28Developmentally• As children age, their brains mature, leading to advances in:
    o Input (perception)
    o Information Processing (e.g. memory, attention, executive function)
    o Output (behaviour)
    • Increasing ability to process and respond to perceptual information
    o Connection to Empiricist accounts of development.
    o Also Nativist accounts, which don’t dispute the importance of perception in development.
  29. 29Memory ProcessesENCODING RETENTION RETRIEVAL
    In general, capacity in all three of these memory components increases across the early childhood years.
    Preference for a new stimulus is taken as evidence for a stored representation of the old stimulus
  30. 30Studying Memory in Preverbal Infants Visual Paired Comparison Task (VPC) Studying Memory in Preverbal Infants• Studying Memory in Preverbal Infants
    o Elicited Imitation: preverbal infants can demonstrate they remember an event by imitating it.
    o Infants can still imitate after an extended delay e.g. even a few months
    • Encoding: Factors affecting encoding
    o Time: how long is needed to encode what is seen.
    o Do infants notice the novel image?
    o 6 month olds do, but they need longer to familiarize themselves with the initial stimuli
    o 12 month olds do this faster
  31. 31Encoding: Factors affecting encoding • Stimulus Complexityo Given the same amount of time to encode during familiarization:
     2-3 Month-Olds encode “simple” visual forms
     4-Month-Olds encode more complex images
     5-6 Month-Olds encode the MOST complex images
    o 5-6 Month-Olds need different amounts of time to encode different levels of stimulus complexity:
     Simple: 4 seconds
     More complex: 17 seconds
     MOST complex: 20-25 seconds
  32. 32Storage: Retention Phase• Vary the length of the delay
    • How long do infants remember what they have learned in Phase 2?
    • Storage: Retention Phase
    • 2 months – can’t remember
    • 3 months – remember for about a week
    • 6 months – 2 weeks
    • Train task – learning continues to increase as age increases
  33. 33Retrieval• Cues that are highly similar to the actual memory retrieve it best.
    • How do cues help infants retrieve memories, and how does this develop?
  34. 34Forms of Human MemoryEnter text here...Forms of Human Memory
  35. 35Short Term Memory • Taskso Recall of word lists
    o Digit span
    o Pattern recall
    o Listening span
  36. 36• Children with different learning disorders show effects on specific components of STMo Dyslexia: impaired phonological loop
    o Dyscalculia: deficits in visual-spatial sketchpad
    o ADHD: deficits in central executive.
     Domain specifities in deficits of memory
  37. 37LTM: Procedural vs. Declarative Memory• Aided by language – older = better language development = better explicit memory
    • Imitation tasks in which children imitate sequences of actions after a delay of 1-3 months
    • Ability to remember sequences of actions implies declarative memory
    • At 9 months, infants do not clearly imitate the correct sequence
    • At 10 months, infants DO imitate the correct sequence
  38. 38LTM: Episodic vs. Semantic Memory (Smell and treasure chest tasks)• How they knew the scent (they smelt it)
    • Show – show the action of sniffing
    • Doll – show what the doll would need to do also find out the smell
    • Infants ask to dig in treasure chest, but it is locked!
    • Presented with a selection of objects and asked to choose one (immediately or after a delay) – do they choose the key?!
  39. 39LTM: Emergence of Autobiographical Memory1. Explicit rehearsal of past events
    2. Development of narrative and other linguistic skills.
    o 3 year old narrative
    o 6 year old narrative
    3. Social sharing of memories
    o 3 year old
    o 6 year old
    4. Development of a sense of self
  40. 40Attention Attention: Orienting• Directing attention to a particular region.
    • Example: Attention being captured by flashing lights and sounds.
    • Many studies of infant cognition rely on overt orienting of attention
    (e.g., shifting eye gaze)
    o Basic response, in place very early in development
  41. 41Attention: Alerting• Arousal of the attentional system through a cue
    o The cue indicates the presence of a target in the environment, and provides some information about the target.
    • Attention: Alerting
    • The types of cues that infants use shift across the first year.
    • Joint Attention: shared focus on an object.
    o <6 months: Exchange looks and facial expressions with an adult
    (dyadic joint attention)
    o 6 months: Begin to follow gaze cues
    o 8-9 months: Begin to follow pointing cues (triadic joint attention
  42. 42• Alerting also improves considerably across the early school years.o Faster response to valid cues over invalid and neutral
    o 8yo remarkably slower than adults. 10yo somewhere in-between
    o Ability/speed of using cues increases with age
  43. 43Attention: Executive Function• A set of functions for controlling and co-ordinating cognitive processes during the performance of complex cognitive operations
    • Three primary executive functions:
    o Inhibition: the inhibition of dominant responses.
    o Updating Working Memory: updating and manipulating information in short term memory.
    o Shifting/Flexibility: switching from one task to another.
    o These components are separable, but also highly correlated.
  44. 44Executive Function: Inhibition • Inhibition: Stroop Task (1935)Develop the ability to inhibit (3/4)
    Increase in the efficiency of inhibition with age
  45. 45Executive Function: Working Memory • Development of Working Memory:8 months: Infants remember the location of an occluded object for 2-3 seconds
    14 months - 10 seconds
    - Working memory increases from age 4 up to adolescence
  46. 46Executive Function: Shifting/Flexibility • Shifting:• Shifting:
    Plus-minus task (1927)
    o Reaction times are typically much longer on alternating
    (i.e., switch) trials than on blocked (i.e., add/subtract task) trials.
  47. 47• Development of Shifting:• How is shifting assessed in children?
    • It is thought that shifting relies on the ability to inhibit
    o 3-4 year-old children can shift in simple tasks
    o In more complex tasks shifting increases by about 5-6
    • The ability to shift develops further in adolescence into adulthood
    o With age, accuracy in shifting tasks increases, but speed decreases
    o Shifting may not improve so much as we learn to trade off speed for accuracy
  48. 48How is Executive Function manifested in the brain?• Various executive functions (switching, inhibition) activate prefrontal cortex in studies using fMRI.
    • It is argued that different executive functions may rely on common neural substrate within prefrontal cortex.
  49. 49Maturation of Prefrontal Cortex• Prefrontal areas targeted by EF research reach a mature state quite late in development.
    • Primary motor and perceptual areas reach a mature state (=are blue) early in development.
    • Age 5  age 20
    • Yellow regions – less mature
    • Blue regions – approached adult levels of maturity
  50. 50Improving Executive Functioning in children• Several activities improve the performance of executive functions:
    o Computerized Training, Aerobic Exercise, Sports, Martial Arts,
    Mindfulness Practices, School Curricula (and others)
    • Lots of individual variation in executive function
    o Delays don’t necessarily signal impairment
    • For children with impaired executive functions, early interventions may do the most to avert later achievement gaps.
    o Those with greatest impairments show greatest gains from intervention
  51. 51Attention Deficit Disorders• Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)
    o Second most common psychiatric disorder of childhood.
    o 2-5% of primary school age children (boys > girls).
    o Persistent and impairing symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity and impulsivity.
    • Caused by both heritable and non-heritable factors
    o Twin studies: 70-80% heritability
    o Genetic studies: genes linked to dopaminergic and serotonergic pathways
    o Other influences: maternal substance misuse during pregnancy, prematurity, nutritional deficiencies, exposure to environmental toxicants
  52. 52ADHD: Diagnosis• Three core symptoms:
    • Inattention
    • Hyperactivity
    • Impulsivity
    • Assessment based on standardized questionnaires and clinical interview.
  53. 53ADHD: Treatmento Psychosocial interventions: parent training, social skills training, cognitive training, classroom interventions.
     Systematic review of RCTs reports no evidence of effect of behavioural intervention when using blinded assessors.
     Psychosocial interventions nevertheless important for long term management of co-morbidities, improving self esteem and peer/family relationships.
    o Drugs: psychostimulants, noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors
     Systematic review of RCTs demonstrate effects of drugs on core symptoms (but not specific to ADHD).
     Disadvantages: side effect, unclear long-term benefits (longitudinal studies).
  54. 54ADHD Debate: Is ADHD actually a disorder?• Variation in prevalence and treatment rates across countries.
    What causes this variation?
    o Cultural expectations of behaviour
    o Classification (ICD vs. DSM)
    o Involvement of industry
    • Strength of the evidence base
  55. 55What is Intelligence? • Intelligence as a single traito Spearman: general and specific factors
     One general factor (g), used in many cognitive tasks
     Several specific factors (s), for specific tasks
  56. 56• Intelligence as a few basic abilities o Fluid intelligence vs. Crystallized intelligence Fluid: ability to solve novel problems
     Crystallized: ability to use skills, knowledge and experience
    o Thurstone: several primary mental abilities
  57. 57• Intelligence as many different abilitieso Gardner: multiple intelligences
     Linguistic, logical-mathematical, spatial, musical, bodily kinaesthetic, intrapersonal, interpersonal, naturalistic
     Distinct, and develop separately
    o Sternberg: many different skills are necessary for producing intelligent behaviour
     Skills related to: encoding information, remembering, reasoning, devising new solutions, responding to context, etc...
  58. 58• Measuring Intelligence • Typically, one Dependent Variable• IQ scores don’t change with age
    o Because IQ scores are normally distributed around a mean of 100, for each age
    o As a result, IQ is comparable across ages
    • If a child aged 5 has an IQ of 130 and a child aged 10 also has an IQ of 130…
    o Both are in the top 2% of their age group
  59. 59Testing Infants’ Intelligence • Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID):• 1 month – 3.5 years
    • Mental scale: looking for hidden items, naming pictures
    • Motor scale: grasping ability, jumping skills
    • Language, Emotion, Adaptive Behaviour scales
    • Fagan Test of Infant Intelligence: 
    o Presented with familiar test around 10 times
    o Test phase – pay more attention to new face
  60. 60Stanford – Binet Test:• Emphasis on higher functions
    o Reasoning, judgment, memory, comprehension
    • Attempt to make the test appropriate for different ages
    o Introduced the concept of mental age
    • Updated several times since 1916 original
    o To make the test more appropriate for different cultural and educational backgrounds.
    o To focus more on information processing, memory, things related to fluid intelligence
  61. 61Wechsler Intelligence Scales (1950s - present) • Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC)o Corresponds to Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (WAIS)
    o Most widely used intelligence test for children over the age of 6.
    o Widely used for admissions to primary schools in the United States.
    • DV = IQ, but calculation drops the concept of mental age.
    o Verbal Comprehension
     Vocabulary: What is a helicopter?
     Similarities: What do orange juice and water have in common?Testing Children’s Intelligence
    o Perceptual Reasoning
    • Reliability: how consistently the test produces the same results.
    • Validity: how accurately the test measures what it claims to.
  62. 62Testing Children’s Intelligence Reliability & Validity• Reliability: how consistently the test produces the same results.
    • Validity: how accurately the test measures what it claims to.
    • Continuity of IQ scores
    o 1 or 2 measures/score of IQ do not correlate very well earlier in childhood
    o This improves later in childhood
  63. 63• Infant testso Poor reliability of IQ scores
     i.e., poor consistency between < 5 year scores and later scores
    o Poor validity for intelligence, but decently valid for detecting developmental disorders.
  64. 64• Children’s testso Impressive reliability from age 5 onwards:
    o IQ at age 5 correlated with IQ at age 15 (0.67)
    o Reliability affected by:
     Temporal proximity of two tests
     Age (scores more reliable for older children)
  65. 65• Is intelligence determined by genetic or by environmental factors? Nature’s Contributions• Genetic contributions to intelligence
    • Genotype-environment interactions
  66. 66Nurture’s Contributions• Microsystem: Family, School
    • Mesosystems: Interactions, e.g. between parents and teachers
    • Exosystems: Poverty, parents’ workplace stress
    • Macrosystem: Cultural Stereotypes
  67. 67Genetic Contribution: Family Studies• Evidence for both biological and environmental influences on IQ.
  68. 68Genotype-Environment Interactions• Passive Interactions: Parents’ genes may shape the home environment that they create, and they pass their genes on to their children.
    o Environment may be a marker for the parental genes that cause a trait, not a cause in of itself.
    o genes create the environment through the parents and the behaviour through the children
    • Evocative Interactions: Children’s traits may emerge
    through their influence on those around them.
    o Inherited genes may evoke environmental responses.
    o correlation between environment and traits, but causation cannot be established
    • Active Interactions: Children may inherit genes that cause them to select a specific environment.
  69. 69Nurture’s Influence on Intelligence• Microsystem: The Family
    o HOME Study:
    Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment
     Safety, education and the type of resources children have access to
    • Communicative and affective interactions between caregiver and child
    • How the caregiver disciplines the child
    • Types of age-appropriate toys available to the child
    • How the child’s time and personal space is organized
    • How the caregiver interacts physically with the child
    • The way the child’s daily routine is designed to incorporate social meetings with other people
  70. 70Correlational study- Positive correlation between HOME scores at 2 years, and IQ at 6-8 years. (Olson, Bates & Kaskie, 1992)
     Particularly for measures of verbal stimulation
    - Positive correlation between HOME scores and IQ, for children aged both 3-5 and 6-8 (Luster & Dubow, 1992)
     However, this correlation was weaker for elementary schoolers than for pre-schoolers, suggesting increased importance of school environments over home environments.
  71. 71Microsystem: Schooling• Structure of school and nature of school environment affects cognitive ability, feeding into IQ
    • Curriculum and school environment plays a big role in cognitive abilities – ages between grades can be close/overlap yet there is still a large difference in ability.
  72. 72Mesosystem: interaction between Microsystems• Weaker correlation between HOME scores and IQ for elementary school children (6-8), relative to preschool aged children (3-5)
    o May indicate increasing influence of school environments on IQ
    o Which is pushing against the influence of home environments.
  73. 73Exosystem: Poverty and Social Class• The adequacy of family income before age 3 positively predicts children’s IQ scores at age 5. (Duncan et al., 1994)
    o Persistent poverty being more influential than transient poverty
    • 1950s: Social class at birth positively predicted child IQ at age 7, 9, and 11 years of age (Lawlor et al., 2005)
    o Class measured as the professionalism of father’s occupation in 1950’s Aberdeen
  74. 74Exosystem: Social Risk Factors• How do many social risk factors cumulatively impact IQ?
    o Minority group status
    o Head of household occupation
    o Maternal education, anxiety, mental health
    o Father absence
    o Family size
    o Stressful life events (e.g. loss of jobs, deaths, illness)
    o Parent/child interactions (i.e. coded videotapes)
    o Parental perspectives
     Knowledge of development
     Socialization goals: obedience, responsibility, curiosity
    • Low risk factors = higher IQ scores
  75. 75Macrosystem: Racial and ethnic stereotypes• Some have claimed that the average IQ scores of children of different racial and ethnic groups differ.
    • Note: the discussion is about the potential for differences in group averages. This says nothing about individuals.
    • Some have claimed that the average IQ scores of children of different racial and ethnic groups differ.
    • First of all: There is excellent evidence that differences in IQ and achievement tests of children from different backgrounds reflect environmental factors.
    o Studies of adopted children show that being raised in a good environment drastically improves IQ scores
     Bringing scores of children from all backgrounds into the normal range.
  76. 76Is “IQ” useful?• High correlation between IQ and academic achievement as well as occupational success (Geary, 2005)
    • Measures of cognitive ability (related to IQ) do predict higher wages
    • Though, what about when you control for other factors?
    o Parental attitude about college
    o Parents’ education, occupations
    o Household income
    o Community and High School characteristics
    o Family size
    • IQ measured at age 17 predicts income at age 35 and 53
    o 15 points of IQ translates to ~3-12% increase in earnings, but controlled Macro factors have a SUBSTANTIAL effect.
  77. 77Is “Intelligence” useful?• Having seen the ways in which intelligence is assessed through measures of IQ
    o and the factors that contribute to the rise and fall of IQ scores in children
     It is worth considering what “intelligence” is.
  78. 78Learning Behaviourist and Cognitivist theories• Behaviourist Theories of Learning:
    o Emphasis on changes in behaviour that result from experience.
    o DV = behaviour.
    • Cognitivist Theories of Learning:
    o Emphasis on changes in knowledge
    o Cognitive processes by which knowledge is acquired, stored/organized, retrieved.
    o DV = measurement of recognition or recall.
  79. 79Behaviourist Accounts of Learning• Classical conditioning: learning through association
    • Operant conditioning: learning through consequences
    • Observational learning: learning through observation.
  80. 80Classical Conditioning• Changes in behaviour that arise from an association being built between two previously unrelated stimuli.
    • Child Development
    • Little Albert Experiment (1920)
    • 2-48 hour-old infants learned to associate forehead stroking with tasting a sugar solution.
    o Conditioned infants displayed more suckling motions and crying after forehead stroking
  81. 81Operant Conditioning• Changes in behaviour that result from the realization that one’s behaviour has consequences or effects.
    o Neutral Operants: Responses from the environment that have no effect on the probability that a behaviour is repeated.
    o Reinforcers: Responses from the environment that increase the probability of a behaviour being repeated.
    o Punishers: Responses form the environment that decrease the probability of a behaviour being repeated.
  82. 82Observational Learning• Changes in behaviour after observing another perform an action
  83. 83Cognitivist Accounts of Learning• Learning through statistical regularities.
    • Learning through association.
    • Learning through imitation.
    • Explanation-based learning.
  84. 84Statistical Learning• Infants show longer looking times to novel words (e.g., pigobi), even if the new word is made up a combination they encountered in the speech stream (e.g., golatu).
  85. 85Learning through Imitation• Children’s imitation is…
    o Goal Directed
    o Rational
    • Children good at touching correct ear, but not at using the correct hand – imitated the goal but not the manner
    • Infants imitate by using head but only if the adults hands are on the table
    • Adults hand are not visible/appear to be occupied – infants turn on light with hands
  86. 86Explanation based learning• Learning through explanation
    o Study of verbal utterances by 4 children aged 2-4
    o 120,996 utterances
    o Explanations were a relatively small proportion of total utterances, but increase substantially
    from ~age 2
    • Children aged 3-6 were shown how to use a novel toy, then asked to explain how it worked
    • Explainers performed better than Non-explainers on measures of causal knowledge
    o But, not on measures of non-causal knowledge
    o e.g., color of the components
     Producing own explanations enables a deeper understanding of the causal world
  87. 87What can developmental disorders tell us about cognitive development?• Perspectives like: Cognitive Genetics
    o If discrete cognitive abilities are associated with
    a well-described genetic disorder
    o We can make inferences about how genes are involved in those cognitive abilities.
    o And, how these genes affect development,
    though may not often be the focus.
    • Perspectives like: Neuroconstructivism
    o Gene expression changes, unfolding over time, just like cognitive abilities themselves
    o This makes it very difficult to assess whether a cognitive trait is the result of a missing gene
    o Or, rather, something missing from (or present in) the environment that changes gene expression
     Difficulty to directly connect genes to cognitive abilities, fully excluding the influence of the environment
  88. 88WS: Clinical Diagnosis • 1 in 7,500 to 20,000 births • Physical features:o Cardiac, musculoskeletal, renal and dental anomalies
    o Hypercalcemia (too much calcium in the blood – weaker bones and heart problems)
    o Distinctive facial morphology
    o Small stature
    o Problems with binocular vision
    o Hyperacusis (oversensitivity to sounds)
     Yet also often have a love of music
  89. 89• Personality: • Cognitive Phenotype:• Personality:
    o Very friendly and gregarious
    o Unafraid of strangers
    o Empathetic, extremely trusting
    and accommodating
    o Overactive, poor concentration
    o Anxiety and phobias
    • Cognitive Phenotype:
    o Impaired
     Spatial and numerical skills
     IQ (range from 40 to 90)
    o Intact
     Language
     Face recognition
     Social interaction skills
  90. 90Double dissociations in developmental disorders• Single dissociation:
    o One disorder is associated with
     Impairment of language
    • Double dissociation:
    o One disorder is associated with
     Impairment of language
     Intact spatial cognition
    o Second disorder is associated with
     Impairment of spatial cognition
     Intact language
    • Compare two disorders to ‘partial out’ the genes which may be associated with a particular development/impairment
  91. 91Williams Syndrome has been used to link genes to several cognitive capacitieso Language
     Double Dissociation:
    Williams and Specific Language Impairment
    o Social Cognition
     Double Dissociation: Williams and Autism
    o Spatial Cognition
     Double Dissociation: Williams and Down Syndrome
    • Williams – good language abilities
    • Spatial Cognition – Williams and downs associated with different spatial deficits
  92. 92WS: Genetics• Deletion of a number of genes on one copy of chromosome 7
    • Wide range of pattern of dissociations allow double dissociations made between specific regions deletions with traits cognitive impairments
  93. 93WS: Overall Cognitive Profile• Relatively impaired spatial abilities, relatively intact linguistic abilities; lower IQ scores
    o Drawing of an elephant contrasted highly with verbal description
  94. 94Language Processing• Expressive
    • Relative strength in grammar
    • Unusual vocabulary
    • Enrichment of linguistic affect• Both good at producing equal numbers of common animals
    • Williams children better at producing uncommon names
    • Children with Williams used narrative enrichment devises much more than those with downs and typically developing children
    o WS language abilities are better than DS, but not better than age matched controls.
  95. 95Language Processing • Cognitive Genetics:o Genes coding for language skills are clearly intact in those with Williams Syndrome.
    o Double Dissociations with disorders in which language is impaired (e.g., SLI, dyslexia) will tell us about which genes are linked to language.
  96. 96• Neuroconstructivism:o We still know little about gene-environment interactions.
    o The absence of certain genes may be associated with impaired or intact language, but we don’t know why.
    o Genes could shape the development of language at different ages, through different pathways
  97. 97WS: Social Interaction• Richness of language may particularly come from more social language.
    • Adolescents with Williams used more socially evaluative language in an experimental interview.
    • As early as age 3,
    children with Williams are more likely to initiate dyadic interactions both with their parent and
    with a novel adult
    • But, even more so with the novel adult.
  98. 98WS: Facial Recognition• Participants presented with Face #1
    • Then tasked with detecting whether Face #2 was different
    • Differences in configuration were detected LESS by Williams than by TD adults
    (51% to 75% of the time)
    • Differences in features were detected by BOTH Williams and TD adults (86% to 85% of the time)
    • Suggests that even though overall face processing is similar
    • In Williams, facial configurations are particularly impaired
  99. 99WS: Social Cognition• Although those with Williams show a strong interest in people:
    o They perform relatively poorly on both verbal and non-verbal tests of theory of mind.
    • They have trouble distinguishing ironic jokes from lies.
    • Perhaps why clinical reports describe those with Williams as often making poor social judgements
    o Find it difficult to maintain friendships
  100. 100Cognitive Genetics:o Genes coding for systems that motivate social interest and social interaction are clearly intact in Williams Syndrome.
    o Double Dissociations with disorders in which social interest is impaired (e.g., autism) will tell us about which genes are linked to social interest and cognition.
  101. 101• Neuroconstructivism:o Exploring the development of particular impairments tells us more than knowing whether they are linked to genes.
    o Lack of inhibition in interacting with strangers develops early, by about age 3, suggesting less impact of environment.
    o Impairments in facial recognition are stable from adolescence to adulthood, suggesting less impact of environment (or earlier).
  102. 102• WS: Visual-Spatial Processing • Theories on the nature of the visual-spatial disorder o Local processing bias hypothesis o Dorsal stream deficit hypothesisTesting the dorsal stream deficit hypothesis
    • 4-5 yo TD children were worse at motion than form, but by age 15 performance was equal.
    • WS children were generally worse
    at both tasks than TD children,
    many were similar to TD 4-5 yos.
    • A small subset of WS children were consistently worse at motion than form (i.e. dorsal stream deficit).
    • Others were impaired on form and motion (i.e. general problems with global configurations).
  103. 103WS: fMRI and Visual-Spatial Processing• Participants solved visuo-spatial tasks involving matching, or judging whether objects fit together.
    • Adults with Williams showed reduced activation in parietal lobe areas of the dorsal stream
    • Possibly connected to neighboring reductions in grey matter volume in the visual cortex.
  104. 104WS: Visual-Spatial Processing• Complex pattern of impairments within the visuo-spatial domain in Williams Syndrome.
    o Local processing bias is possible
    o Some evidence for a deficit in dorsal stream processing
  105. 105Spatial Cognition • Cognitive Geneticso Genes whose deletions are associated with Williams may be associated with the development of the dorsal stream.
    o Double Dissociations with disorders in which visuo-spatial processing is not impaired (e.g., Down Syndrome) and in which the dorsal stream is also is impaired (e.g., autism) will tell us about which genes are linked to dorsal stream processing.
  106. 106• Neuroconstructivism:o We don’t know if dorsal stream deficits are causes or effects.
    o Are individuals with Williams impaired in spatial cognition because they have a structurally abnormal dorsal stream?
    o Or, does the dorsal stream develop unusually because individuals are biased away from particular kinds of spatial inputs?
  107. 107What Can Developmental Disorders Tell Us About Typical Cognitive Development?• Cognitive genetics focuses on the role of genes in coding for particular cognitive abilities.
    o What cognitive abilities are impaired/intact in individuals with well-described genetically based disorders?
    o Are specific cognitive abilities selectively affected in
    individuals with specific genetic differences?
    • Neuroconstructivism focuses on the role of gene expression through development.
    o Linking genes and disorders tells us less than we may think
    o There is little evidence that an entire cognitive domain is affected exclusively by any particular set of genes
     There is typically a constellation of strengths and weaknesses across multiple domains.
    o Focusing too much on genetic differences and adult end-states distracts from the role of gene-environment interactions
     in the developmental construction of cognitive abilities.

Information

Description
A-Level Psychology Flashcards on D&L TB8, created by Emily Hargreaves on 22/05/2019.
Views
4
Rating

Feedback

What is it about?

What do you think of the new look?

How do you like it?