1 / 21

Context & Cognition

Context & Cognition. Early Years Lecture 15. This lecture. 1 Defining context 2 Contextualizing Piagetian tasks domain-general logic? influence of others? Q. Does context ‘drive’ cognition? 3. Young children’s suggestibility accuracy of eye-witness testimony

merlin
Download Presentation

Context & Cognition

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Context & Cognition Early Years Lecture 15

  2. This lecture 1 Defining context 2 Contextualizing Piagetian tasks domain-general logic? influence of others? Q. Does context ‘drive’ cognition? 3. Young children’s suggestibility accuracy of eye-witness testimony context and false-reporting

  3. Defining context 4 different types: (Ceci, 1993) physical social mental historical Fit? Not easy to say – ‘interconnected whole?’ matrix of conditions... which instantiates the demands of a task (Lucariello, 1995)

  4. An alternative approach Q. Is cognitive ability situation-specific? manipulate context > reveal/hide cognition? emphasis on context-specificity of thought (Cole, 1992) which tasks? – Classic Piagetian? e.g., [1] conservation [2] three-mountains task

  5. Naughty Teddy Experimenter transformation (i.e., traditional study) = 40% conserved Teddy transformation = 70% conserved Both versions? Performance on standard task is greater if naughty teddy version conducted first

  6. Also problem of asking same Q. twice .... misleading? (Rose & Blank, 1974) Standard version Q1. “Are they the same?” (do they have the same amount?) Yes! watch as E transforms row Q2. “Are they still the same?” What is E wanting me to figure out? One-judgment version e.g., child questioned only after transformation number of conservation errors is halved!

  7. Replicated findings? • Light, Buckingham & Robbins (1979) Volume conservation - ‘chipped’ glass = dangerous! 70% vs 5% • Samuel & Bryant (1984) Single Q. effect for mass and volume i.e., second question is cue to change judgment

  8. Conservation or Conversation? Mass Area Roll-out pastry.. ..same amount? rearrange fence sections to make square pen... ...fit as many animals in?

  9. 3 Mountains Task? • Hughes (1975) Similar context - where should robber hide? A B P C D

  10. 3 Mountains Task? • 4 year olds = 90% success even when taking 2 perspectives into account! P A B P C D

  11. Does context drive cognitive change? Example: (Inagaki, 1990) Children’s grasp of biological functions Group 1: Reared goldfish at home Group 2: No pet rearing at all Group 1 = more factual knowledge about fish = more procedural knowledge (care) .. also more knowledge of unobservable attributes (fish have hearts), fish-health (don’t feed too much) ... and generalized to other species (e.g., frogs)

  12. Does context drive cognitive change? Support? (Namiki & Inagaki, 1984) Class where teacher rears rabbit Children acquire factual/procedural knowledge ... but no conceptual understanding (i.e., why) Duty? Extrinsic reward (e.g., payment) reduced amount of knowledge acquired(Inagaki, 1980)

  13. Beyond Piagetian cognition... Impact of context in social settings.. ... context and testimony Q1. How suggestible are young children? Important: sexual abuse cases (1% in ’91; 2% in ’96) i.e., nearly 1 million cases in USA Q2. What might influence false-reporting in young children?

  14. Young children’s suggestibility What is it? - inclusion of erroneous information in testimony etc. traditional view = 2 types of influencing factors [1] Cognitive, e.g., memory (imagined vs real) [2] Social, e.g., gendered play (see Lect. 9) 3 examples from Ceci & Crotteau Huffman (see Blackwell Reader in Developmental Psychology)

  15. Example 1: The visit of Sam Stone Group 1 (control group) free recall (what happened when Sam came..?) + Q1. “Did Sam rip a book?” Q2. “Did he spill something on a teddy bear?” Group 2 (stereotype group) told all about Sam’s ‘clumsiness’ weeks in advance Group 3 (suggestion group) Q1. “Did Sam rip the book on purpose?” Group 4 (stereotype + suggestion) Did Sam do these things?

  16. Sam Stone’s behaviour Group 1 10% = yes 5% = saw him do it Group 2 42% = yes 19% = saw him do it Group 3 52% = yes 10% = saw him do it Group 4 72% = yes 44% = saw him do it

  17. Example 2: Repeated interviews Children (3-4) asked about false events e.g., “Did you ever get your hand caught in a mousetrap & go to the hospital? Think real hard” Week 1 – 10% said yes Week 10 – 55% said yes 27% were unconvinced that the event had never actually happened

  18. Example 3: Sexual abuse.... ? Real-life scenario > consequences? 3-year-olds Visits to doctors – half = genital examination (GE) half = non genital (Non G-E) Interview: given doll – “Where did doc touch you?” GE group - < 30% identified genitals Non GE – > 50% identified genitals less accurate when pointing to doll i.e., doll is contextual influence on accuracy of recall

  19. Conclusions Context is created... it is not just ‘out there’ waiting to impose itself. Context ‘weaves’ strands of behaviour together ... behaviour depends on which strands are woven together... when... and by whom

  20. Reading • Ceci, S. J., & Crotteau Huffman, M. L. (1997). In A. Slater & D. Muir (1999), The Blackwell Reader in Developmental Psychology, pp. 194-211. Oxford: Blackwell. • Cole, Cole & Lightfoot (2005), pp. 328-329 • Donaldson, M. (1978). Children’s Minds. (Chapter 6). • Miller, P. (2002). Theories of developmental psychology, pp. 372-377.

  21. Tutorial Weeks 9/10 Reading in ‘Tutorial Solutions’ in Library Cole, M. (1992). Context, modularity and the cultural constitution of development.

More Related