06 Dec Discuss how cognitive and language development are connected. Summa

Throughout this course, you will be creating a series of parent handouts focused on the various ages and stages of development. The third week of class has focused on infancy and toddlerhood; therefore, this will be the focus of your Week 3 assignment. Continuing with the same template from your Week 1 Theory Parent Handout assignment and your Week 2 Prenatal and Newborn Parent Handout, complete the slides for the Week 3 portion.

To prepare:

· Read Chapter 6: Cognitive Development in Infancy and Toddlerhood

· Read Chapter 7: Emotional and Social Development in Infancy and Toddlerhood

· Watch  Baby Human to Belong Sense of Self Links to an external site.

· Watch  Baby Human to Belong Attachment Links to an external site.

· Watch  To Talk Links to an external site.

· Find and open your latest version of the  Parent Handout template on your computer. You will be adding on to this document.

 

For your assignment, complete the following:

Handout:

· Discuss how cognitive and language development are connected.

· Summarize how motor development influences infant and toddler social experiences.

· Describe how you will create a learning environment that fosters the development of self-regulation, secure attachment, and self-control.

· Explain three resources for families to support them during the infant and toddler stage of development. Be sure to include a link to each resource.

· One resource should be a quick read for families on the go.

· One resource should be more detailed for families who want to learn more.

· One resource should be user-friendly for diverse families (e.g., ELL, single parents, grandparents raising grandchildren, etc.).

Reflection:

· Explain your role as an educator in providing developmental activities that support physical, cognitive, and social-emotional growth from 2 months to 2 years.

· Describe what it means to be a socially-emotionally competent infant and toddler caregiver.

· Discuss how you will foster relationships that promote cognitive and language development in infants and toddlers.

 

The Infant and Toddler Parent Handout paper

· Must be three pages in length and formatted according to template.

· Must utilize academic voice. See the  Academic Voice  Links to an external site. resource for additional guidance.

· Must use at least two scholarly sources in addition to the course text. These scholarly resources should be different than the resources provided for families. Must follow  APA Style  Links to an external site. as outlined in the Writing Center.

· The  Scholarly, Peer-Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources  Links to an external site. table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment.

· To assist you in completing the research required for this assignment, view the  Quick and Easy Library Research  Links to an external site. tutorial, which introduces the University of Arizona Global Campus Library and the research process, and provides some library search tips.

,

CHAPTER 6 COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT IN INFANCY AND TODDLERHOOD

The Birds Are Back

Lene Margrethe Linnerud, 12 years, Norway

Children greet a returning flock of birds while their baby sibling plays nearby. In Chapter 6, you will see that a stimulating environment and the guidance of more mature members of their culture ensure that infants’ and toddlers’ cognition will develop at its best.

Reprinted with permission from The International Museum of Children’s Art, Oslo, Norway

WHAT’S AHEAD IN CHAPTER 6

6.1 Piaget’s Cognitive-Developmental Theory

Piaget’s Ideas About Cognitive Change • The Sensorimotor Stage • Follow-Up Research on Infant Cognitive Development • Evaluation of the Sensorimotor Stage

■ Social Issues: Education: Baby Learning from Screen Media: The Video Deficit Effect

6.2 Information Processing

Assumptions of the Information-Processing Perspective • Attention • Memory • Categorization • Evaluation of Information-Processing Findings

■ Biology and Environment: Infantile Amnesia

6.3 The Social Context of Early Cognitive Development

■ Cultural Influences: Social Origins of Make-Believe Play

6.4 Individual Differences in Early Mental Development

Infant and Toddler Intelligence Tests • Early Environment and Mental Development • Early Intervention for At-Risk Infants and Toddlers

6.5 Language Development

Theories of Language Development • Getting Ready to Talk • First Words • The Two-Word Utterance Phase • Individual and Cultural Differences • Supporting Early Language Development

■ Biology and Environment: Thiamine Deficiency in the First Year and Later Language Impairment

When 19-month-olds Caitlin and Grace and 21-month-old Timmy gathered at Ginette’s child-care home, the playroom was alive with activity. The three spirited explorers were bent on discovery. Grace dropped shapes through holes in a plastic box that Ginette held and adjusted so the more difficult ones would fall smoothly into place. Once a few shapes were inside, Grace grabbed the box and shook it, squealing with delight as the lid fell open and the shapes scattered around her. The clatter attracted Timmy, who picked up a shape, carried it to the railing at the top of the basement steps, dropped it overboard, and then followed it with a teddy bear, a ball, his shoe, and a spoon.

Meanwhile, Caitlin pulled open a drawer, unloaded a set of wooden bowls, stacked them in a pile, knocked it over, and then banged two bowls together. With each action, the children seemed to be asking, “How do things work? What makes interesting events happen? Which ones can I control?”

As the toddlers experimented, I could see the beginnings of spoken language—a whole new way of influencing the world. “Baw!” Caitlin exclaimed as Timmy tossed the bright red ball down the basement steps. “Bye-bye,” Grace chimed in, waving as the ball rolled out of sight. Later that day, Grace revealed that she could pretend. “Night-night,” she said, hugging her teddy bear, putting her head down, briefly closing her eyes, then “awakening” and exclaiming, “No more nap!”

Over the first two years, the small, reflexive newborn baby becomes a self-assertive, purposeful being who solves simple problems and starts to master the most amazing human ability: language. Parents wonder, “How does all this happen so quickly?” This question has also captivated researchers, yielding a wealth of findings along with vigorous debate over how to explain the astonishing pace of infant and toddler cognitive development.

In this chapter, we take up three perspectives: Piaget’s cognitive-developmental theory, information processing, and Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. We also consider the usefulness of tests that measure infants’ and toddlers’ intellectual progress. Finally, we look at the dawning of language. We will see how toddlers’ first words build on early cognitive achievements and how, very soon, new words and expressions greatly increase the speed and flexibility of thinking. Throughout development, cognition and language mutually support each other. ■

6.1 PIAGET’S COGNITIVE-DEVELOPMENTAL THEORY

Swiss theorist Jean Piaget inspired a vision of children as busy, motivated explorers whose thinking develops as they act directly on the environment. Influenced by his background in biology, Piaget believed that the child’s mind forms and modifies psychological structures so they achieve a better fit with external reality. Recall from Chapter 1 that in Piaget’s theory, children move through four stages between infancy and adolescence. During these stages, Piaget claimed, all aspects of cognition develop in an integrated fashion, changing in a similar way at about the same time.

Piaget’s sensorimotor stage spans the first two years of life. Piaget believed that infants and toddlers “think” with their eyes, ears, hands, and other sensorimotor equipment. They cannot yet carry out many activities inside their heads. But by the end of toddlerhood, children can solve everyday practical problems and represent their experiences in speech, gesture, and play. To appreciate Piaget’s view of how these vast changes take place, let’s consider some important concepts.

6.1.1 Piaget’s Ideas About Cognitive Change

6.1a Explain how, in Piaget’s theory, schemes change over the course of development.

6.1b Describe major cognitive attainments of the sensorimotor stage.

6.1c Explain the implications of follow-up research on infant cognitive development for the accuracy of Piaget’s sensorimotor stage.

According to Piaget, specific psychological structures—organized ways of making sense of experience called schemes—change with age. At first, schemes are sensorimotor action patterns. For example, at 6 months, Timmy dropped objects in a fairly rigid way, simply letting go of a rattle or teething ring and watching with interest. By 18 months, his “dropping scheme” had become deliberate and creative. In tossing objects down the basement stairs, he threw some in the air, bounced others off walls, released some gently and others forcefully. Soon, instead of just acting on objects, he will show evidence of thinking before he acts. For Piaget, this change marks the transition from sensorimotor to preoperational thought.

In Piaget’s theory, two processes, adaptation and organization, account for changes in schemes.

Adaptation

The next time you have a chance, notice how infants and toddlers tirelessly repeat actions that lead to interesting effects. Adaptation involves building schemes through direct interaction with the environment. It consists of two complementary activities: assimilation and accommodation. During assimilation, we use our current schemes to interpret the external world. For example, when Timmy dropped objects, he was assimilating them to his sensorimotor “dropping scheme.” In accommodation, we create new schemes or adjust old ones after noticing that our current ways of thinking do not capture the environment completely. When Timmy dropped objects in different ways, he modified his dropping scheme to take account of the varied properties of objects.

According to Piaget, the balance between assimilation and accommodation varies over time. When children are not changing much, they assimilate more than they accommodate—a steady, comfortable state that Piaget called cognitive equilibrium. During times of rapid cognitive change, children are in a state of disequilibrium, or cognitive discomfort. Realizing that new information does not match their current schemes, they shift from assimilation to accommodation. After modifying their schemes, they move back toward assimilation, exercising their newly changed structures until they are ready to be modified again.

Each time this back-and-forth movement between equilibrium and disequilibrium occurs, more effective schemes are produced. Because the times of greatest accommodation are the earliest ones, the sensorimotor stage is Piaget’s most complex period of development.

In Piaget’s theory, first schemes are sensorimotor action patterns. As this 12-month-old experiments with his dropping scheme, his behavior becomes more deliberate and varied.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Organization

Schemes also change through organization, a process that occurs internally, apart from direct contact with the environment. Once children form new schemes, they rearrange them, linking them with other schemes to create a strongly interconnected cognitive system. For example, eventually Timmy will relate “dropping” to “throwing” and to his developing understanding of “nearness” and “farness.” According to Piaget, schemes truly reach equilibrium when they become part of a broad network of structures that can be jointly applied to the surrounding world (Piaget, 1936/1952).

In the following sections, we will first describe infant development as Piaget saw it, noting research that supports his observations. Then we will consider evidence demonstrating that in some ways, babies’ cognitive competence is more advanced than Piaget believed.

6.1.2 The Sensorimotor Stage

The difference between the newborn baby and the 2-year-old child is so vast that Piaget divided the sensorimotor stage into six substages, summarized in Table 6.1. Piaget based this sequence on a very small sample: He observed his own three children carefully and also presented them with everyday problems (such as hidden objects) that helped reveal their understanding of the world.

Table 6.1 Summary of Piaget’s Sensorimotor Stage

Sensorimotor Substage

Typical Adaptive Behaviors

1. Reflexive schemes (birth–1 month)

Newborn reflexes (see Chapter 4, page 134)

2. Primary circular reactions (1–4 months)

Simple motor habits centered around the infant’s own body; limited anticipation of events

3. Secondary circular reactions (4–8 months)

Actions aimed at repeating interesting effects in the surrounding world; imitation of familiar behaviors

4. Coordination of secondary circular reactions (8–12 months)

Intentional, or goal-directed, behavior; ability to find a hidden object in the first location in which it is hidden (object permanence); improved anticipation of events; imitation of behaviors slightly different from those the infant usually performs

5. Tertiary circular reactions (12–18 months)

Exploration of the properties of objects by acting on them in novel ways; imitation of novel behaviors; ability to search in several locations for a hidden object (accurate A–B search)

6. Mental representation (18 months–2 years)

Internal depictions of objects and events, as indicated by sudden solutions to problems; ability to find an object that has been moved while out of sight (invisible displacement); deferred imitation; and make-believe play

According to Piaget, at birth infants know so little that they cannot explore purposefully. The circular reaction provides a special means of adapting their first schemes. It involves stumbling onto a new experience caused by the baby’s own motor activity. The reaction is “circular” because, as the infant tries to repeat the event again and again, a sensorimotor response that originally occurred by chance strengthens into a new scheme. Consider Caitlin, who at age 2 months accidentally made a smacking sound after a feeding. Intrigued, she tried to repeat it until, after a few days, she became quite expert at smacking her lips.

This 3-month-old repeats a newly discovered action—sucking her toes—in a primary circular reaction that helps her gain voluntary control over her behavior.

© minchen liang/Alamy Stock Photo

The circular reaction initially centers on the infant’s own body and later turns outward, toward manipulation of objects. In the second year, it becomes experimental and creative, aimed at producing novel outcomes. Infants’ difficulty stopping themselves from repeating new and interesting behaviors may underlie the circular reaction. This immaturity in inhibition seems to be adaptive, helping to ensure that new skills will not be interrupted before they strengthen (Carey & Markman, 1999). Piaget considered revisions in the circular reaction so important that, as Table 6.1 shows, he named the sensorimotor substages after them.

When this 4-month-old accidentally hits a toy hung in front of her, her action causes it to swing. Using the secondary circular reaction, she tries to recapture this interesting effect. In the process, she forms a new “hitting scheme.”

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Repeating Chance Behaviors

Piaget saw newborn reflexes as the building blocks of sensorimotor intelligence. In Substage 1, babies suck, grasp, and look in much the same way, no matter what experiences they encounter. Around 1 month, as they enter Substage 2, they start to gain voluntary control over their actions through the primary circular reaction, by repeating chance behaviors largely motivated by basic needs. This leads to some simple motor habits, such as sucking their fists or thumbs. Babies of this substage also begin to vary their behavior in response to environmental demands. For example, they open their mouths differently for a nipple than for a spoon. And they start to anticipate events. On awaking from a nap hungry, 3-month-old Timmy would stop crying as soon as Vanessa entered the room—a sign that feeding time was near.

During Substage 3, from 4 to 8 months, infants sit up and reach for and manipulate objects. These motor attainments strengthen the secondary circular reaction, through which babies try to repeat interesting events in the surrounding environment that are caused by their own actions. For example, 4-month-old Caitlin accidentally knocked a toy hung in front of her, producing a fascinating swinging motion. Over the next three days, Caitlin tried to repeat this effect, gradually forming a new “hitting” scheme.

Improved control over their own behavior permits infants to imitate others’ behavior more effectively. Piaget noted, however, that 4- to 8-month-olds cannot adapt flexibly and quickly enough to imitate novel behaviors. Although they enjoy watching an adult demonstrate a game of pat-a-cake, they are not yet able to participate.

Intentional Behavior

In Substage 4, 8- to 12-month-olds combine schemes into new, more complex action sequences. As a result, actions that lead to new schemes no longer have a random, hit-or-miss quality—accidentally bringing the thumb to the mouth or happening to hit the toy. Instead, 8- to 12-month-olds can engage in intentional, or goal-directed, behavior, coordinating schemes deliberately to solve simple problems. Consider Piaget’s famous object-hiding task, in which he shows the baby an attractive toy and then hides it behind his hand or under a cover. Infants of this substage can find the object by coordinating two schemes—”pushing” aside the obstacle and “grasping” the toy. Piaget regarded these means–end action sequences as the foundation for all problem solving.

Retrieving hidden objects reveals that infants have begun to master object permanence, the understanding that objects continue to exist when they are out of sight. But this awareness is not yet complete. Babies make the A-not-B search error: If they reach several times for an object at a first hiding place (A) and then see it moved to a second (B) hiding place, they still search for it in the first hiding place (A). Consequently, Piaget concluded that they do not have a clear image of the object as persisting when hidden from view.

Infants in Substage 4, who can better anticipate events, sometimes use their capacity for intentional behavior to try to change those events. At 10 months, Timmy crawled after Vanessa when she put on her coat, whimpering to keep her from leaving. Also, babies can now imitate behaviors slightly different from those they usually perform. After watching someone else, they try to stir with a spoon, push a toy car, or drop raisins into a cup (Piaget, 1945/1951).

In Substage 5, from 12 to 18 months, the tertiary circular reaction emerges, in which toddlers repeat behaviors with variation. Recall how Timmy dropped objects over the basement steps, trying this action, then that, then another. This deliberately exploratory approach makes 12- to 18-month-olds better problem solvers. For example, Grace figured out how to fit a shape through a hole in a container by turning and twisting it until it fell through and how to use a stick to get an out-of-reach toy. According to Piaget, this capacity to experiment leads toddlers to look for a hidden toy in several locations, displaying an accurate A–B search. Their more flexible action patterns also permit them to imitate many more behaviors, such as stacking blocks, scribbling on paper, and making funny faces.

To find the toy hidden inside the pot, a 10-month-old engages in intentional, goal-directed behavior—the basis for all problem solving.

Using a tertiary circular reaction, this baby twists, turns, and pushes until a block fits through its matching hole in a shape sorter. Between 12 and 18 months, toddlers take a deliberately experimental approach to problem solving.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

Mental Representation

Substage 6 brings the ability to create mental representations—internal depictions of information that the mind can manipulate. Our most powerful mental representations are of two kinds: (1) images—mental pictures of objects, people, and spaces; and (2) concepts—categories in which similar objects or events are grouped together. We use a mental image to retrace our steps when we’ve misplaced something or to imitate someone’s behavior long after observing it. By thinking in concepts and labeling them (for example, “ball” for all rounded, movable objects used in play), we become more efficient thinkers, organizing our diverse experiences into meaningful, manageable, and memorable units.

Piaget noted that 18- to 24-month-olds arrive at solutions suddenly rather than through trial-and-error behavior. In doing so, they seem to experiment with actions inside their heads—evidence that they can mentally represent their experiences. For example, at 19 months, Grace—after bumping her new push toy against a wall—paused for a moment as if to “think,” and then immediately turned the toy in a new direction.

Representation enables older toddlers to solve advanced object permanence problems involving invisible displacement—finding a toy moved while out of sight, such as into a small box while under a cover. It also permits deferred imitation—the ability to remember and copy the behavior of models who are not present. And it makes possible make-believe play, in which children act out everyday and imaginary activities. As the sensorimotor stage draws to a close, mental symbols have become major instruments of thinking.

The capacity for mental representation enables this 20-month-old to engage in first acts of make-believe.

© LAURA DWIGHT PHOTOGRAPHY

6.1.3 Follow-Up Research on Infant Cognitive Development

Many studies suggest that infants display a wide array of understandings earlier than Piaget believed. Recall the operant conditioning research reviewed in Chapter 5, in which newborns sucked vigorously on a nipple to gain access to interesting sights and sounds. This behavior, which closely resembles Piaget’s secondary circular reaction, shows that babies try to explore and control the external world long before 4 to 8 months. In fact, they do so as soon as they are born.

To discover what infants know about hidden objects and other aspects of physical reality, researchers often use the violation-of-expectation method. They may habituate babies to a physical event (expose them to the event until their looking declines) to familiarize them with a situation in which their knowledge will be tested. Or they may simply show babies an expected event (one that is consistent with reality) and an unexpected event (a variation of the first event that violates reality). Heightened attention to the unexpected event suggests that the infant is “surprised” by a deviation from physical reality and, therefore, is aware of that aspect of the physical world.

The violation-of-expectation method is controversial. Some researchers believe that it indicates limited, implicit (nonconscious) awareness of physical events—not the full-blown, conscious understanding that was Piaget’s focus in requiring infants to act on their surroundings, as in searching for hidden objects (Campos et al., 2008). Others maintain that the method reveals only babies’ perceptual preference for novelty, not their knowledge of the physical world. According to these researchers, infants may look longer at the novel (unexpected) event simply because it requires more time to make sense of than the expected event (Dunn & Bremner, 2017; Bremner, Slater, & Johnson, 2015). Let’s examine this debate in light of recent evidence.

Object Permanence

In a series of studies using the violation-of-expectation method, Renée Baillargeon and her collaborators claimed to have found evidence for object permanence in the first few months of life. Figure 6.1 on page 202 describes and illustrates one of these studies, in which infants exposed to both an expected and an unexpected object-hiding event looked longer at the unexpected event (Aguiar & Baillargeon, 2002; Baillargeon & DeVos, 1991).

Additional violation-of-expectation studies yielded similar results, suggesting that infants look longer at a wide variety of unexpected events involving hidden objects (Wang, Baillargeon, & Paterson, 2005). Still, several researchers using similar procedures failed to confirm some of Baillargeon’s findings (Cohen & Marks, 2002; Schöner & Thelen, 2006; Sirois & Jackson, 2012). And, as previously noted, critics question what babies’ looking preferences tell us about what they actually understand.

Another type of looking behavior suggests that young infants are aware that objects persist when out of view. Four- and 5-month-olds will track a ball’s path of movement as it disappears and reappears from behind a barrier, even gazing ahead to where they expect it to emerge. As further support for such awareness, 5- to 9-month-olds more often engaged in such predictive tracking when a ball viewed on a computer screen gradually rolled behind a barrier than when it disappeared instantaneously or imploded (rapidly decreased in size) at the barrier’s edge (Bertenthal, Gredebäck, & Boyer, 2013; Bertenthal, Longo, & Kenny, 2007). With age, babies are more likely to fixate on the predicted place of the ball’s reappearance and wait for it—evidence of an increasingly secure grasp of object permanence.

If young infants do have some notion of object permanence, how do we explain Piaget’s finding that even infants capable of reaching do not try to search for hidden objects before 8 months of age? Compared with looking reactions in violation-of-expectation tasks, searching for a hidden object is far more cognitively demanding: The baby must figure out where the hidden object is. Consistent with this idea, infants solve some object-hiding tasks before others. For example, 10-month-olds search for an object placed on a table and covered by a cloth before they search for an object that a hand deposits under a cloth. Experience with partially hidden objects—common in infants’ everyday lives—may help them grasp that the cloth-covered object has not been replaced by the cloth but, rather, continues to exist and can be retrieved. In the second, more difficult task, infants seem to expect the object to reappear in the hand from which it initially disappeared (Moore & Meltzoff, 1999, 2008). Not until 14 months can most babies infer that the hand deposited the object under the cloth.

Fi