'Piaget’s Developmental Psychology Essay\r'

'Pi maturatet (1896-1980) believed that there was a triplet-figure difference between the intelligence of adults, puppyish small fryren and of develop(predicate)er infantren. He believed adults have repair knowledge of the world and because ball up birdren do not use the same system of logic in there thinking. He believed that youngsterren’s logic changed as they developed through their quaternary stand fors of life Piaget came to this conclusion after end his cognitive give awayg languageth testing. Unlike psychologist Siegler and Huges, Piaget is a theoretical psychologist and carried out many essays to instance his theories.\r\nThese delivers have been critisied by many psychologist including Hughes, Siegler, Rose, Blank. sensori beget Stage Piaget believed that a new born(p) had basic biological motivations, and acquired knowledge by accommodation and assimilation, and once a chela has acquired these schemas it would be at equilibration. It has been argued that Piaget underestimated the intelligence of a newborn. Piaget’s sample did not bedeck a wide variety of kidskinren thence his taste firenot be related to e precise(prenominal) pincer at that relevant age. His break d consume was also only preformed on his own chelaren thusly results could have been bias.\r\nSimilar look intos were devised by other psychologist giving different conclusions, indicating Piaget’s results were not always reli equal to(p). Piaget’s firstborn stage stated that a muck up (0-2) first searchs the world using motor and reflex actions. For example a baby bird r separatelyes towards an aim and after many attempts willing be able to scourtually traction the object and then bring the object to its mouth and will continue to explore it uses the senses of taste and smell. A child is verbalise to have completed this stage of organic evolution once they have obtained object permanence (a child gains that an object sti ll experiences nevertheless when it is not visible).\r\nThis theory was tried by giving a 5-6 months grey-headed child a wager to play with, the gip was covered with a cloth and the muck up’s behavior observed. Results essayed that a indulge immediately lost interest as if the object never existed. unless when tested with a 10 month old child it would continue to reach for the run although it could not see it. Another business relationship is that the child did not think the toy had seized to exist unless was distracted by the movement of the cloth, which is why the child looks away(predicate) and appears to have ‘forgot’ the toy.\r\nBower and Wishart (1972) argued that it does still exist in a babies mind even when it whitethorn not be visible. there experiment was done on a baby less than four months; the baby was despatchered a toy but as it reached for the toy the lights were switched off this showed that even when the lights were off the chil d continued to reach for the toy. It can be argued that the child was not stretching out for the toy but was only if reaching due to the discomfort of the fast darkness. This study could also go against the morality as the child could have been experiencing disquietude from the sudden loss sight. Pre- working(a) Stage\r\nAt this stage a child develops exemplary thinking; another characteristic of this stage is egocentrism. Piaget devised a triplet mountain childbed to test this theory. A child was sit down in front of a three mountains model, a doll was then primed(p) at varies positions in the modeled mountains and pictures were presented, they were asked to woof the picture that represented what the doll could see. intravenous feeding and five year olds selected the picture demonstrate what they could see, this suggested that they thought the doll could see what they could severaliseing egocentrism. However most seven-spot years old were able to identify the correct picture.\r\n due(p) to Piaget’s selection of children it was very strong to apply his determinations to others, his own children were used throughout most of his experiment and any others were from advantageously educated backgrounds. It can be argued that this experiment lacked ecological validity as the child could not relate to the situation they were presented with. Hughes devised a confinement to test egocentrism in a child but relating to an daily situation, children as young as three and a one-half wait oned the inquire correctly, and 90% of children tested altogether were able to moot the correct make. Concrete operational stage\r\nA child enters this stage when they understand the appearance of something may change although the tip itself remains the same. Piaget tested this stage by setting out a haggle of counters in front of each child, than communicate the child to make another row the same as the first one. Piaget would than give out his row of cou nters and ask the child if there were still the same bar of counters. This experiment tested a child’s conservation of numbers. Most seven year olds were able to answer this question correctly concluding by the age of seven children are able to carry on numbers.\r\nTo test the conservation of fluidness Piaget quiet two identical glasses A + B and a taller thin container C and asked the child which container held more, he then transferred the silver from A+B to C and asked the child again. When a child was able to identify that both containers held the same amount of liquid they had get hold ofd the concrete operational stage. Many aspects of this test have been criticized, including the neighborly context of the child’s understanding. Rose and Blank argued that when a child is asked the same question twice they assumed there first answer was incorrect and changed their answer.\r\nWhen Rose and Blank replicated this experiment and only asked the question once most six years olds gave the correct answer. McGarriglr and Donaldson (1974) argued that as the adult changed the appearance children would assume this was large so devised an experiment were the appearance of the items were changed accidently. Children tested were between four and six, results showed that more than half tested gave the correct answer. Confirming children conserve at a younger age than Piaget claimed. Formal Operational Stage\r\nA child shows logical thinking but generally needs to be able to work through sequences with actual objects. erstwhile a child can command ideas in their head it has entered the formal operational stage. Piaget tested this by giving each child string and weightinesss and told them to find out which factors affects a complete swing of the pendulum they could set out the weights, length of string and strength of push. Piaget entrap children who had entered the formal operational stage approached the task systematically testing one covar iant at a time.\r\nPsychologist Robert Siegler (1979) tested children gray five and upwards, by using the balance wheel beam test. Results showed that eventually the child would take into account the interaction between the weight and the disc but would not achieve this ability until they were between 13 and 17. This think that children’s cognitive development is establish on acquiring and using rules in increasingly more complex situations alternatively of stages. Conclusion Piaget tested his children and well-educated professionals therefore making his findings ungeneralised and potentially bias.\r\nSubsequent questions relating to the child’s individual answer may have led children to give the answer researchers were looking for. Piaget underestimated the ability of children’s social understanding. A child’s science of an adult the importance of a known context and the meaning of a sanction question all affect a child’s performance. Weakne sses in Piaget experiment prevent children from showing what understood. Piaget overestimated the age at which children entered the formal operational stage (Siegler). As Piaget focused on individual children he failed to take social settings into account.\r\nHe failed to show that development is continuous and not in stages Evidence suggests that environmental factors, ethics and gender could alter a child’s development. Small samples and controllability of variables were not taken into account. Piagets had very little evidence to support his findings and believed that his finding could be applied to every child. Piaget’s focus on qualitative development has played an important role on education. Piaget opened the opportunities for others to learn and discover more on how children development.\r\n'