3 - 560 3/3 03/03/2009 13:00:00 Did Piaget underestimate...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
560 3/3 03/03/2009 13:00:00 Did Piaget underestimate babies? Was he right? Not so much… Infants are more competent than he thought Why did he miss this? Measures were insensitive—unable to discern the knowledge that underlies the skin o Competence vs. performance o Today: innate, domain-specific modules o E.g., objects, physics math, language Grand theories vs. specific theories Piaget wasn’t ALL wrong Emphasis on qualitative change Asked the right questions given his observations o Limits of observational methods Action does matter o E.g., self-locomotion and the visual cliff Self locomotion and spatial representations (p 277) Self locomotion led to better performance by 10 month olds than being carried Outline Precocious babes! Recent studies Object permanence o Out of sight is NOT out of mind o Evidence that babies represent unseen objects?
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Baillargeon p. 202 3-4 month old: motor limited
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Page1 / 5

3 - 560 3/3 03/03/2009 13:00:00 Did Piaget underestimate...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online