Content deleted Content added
reverted or edited some links added by User:Mbah24 per WP:OVERLINKING, MOS:NOPIPE; removed Hopper from end of article per WP:SPS; fixed some reference errors |
“Development process of children” was changed to “cognitive development of children” to specify the psychological context. Added “the” before each stage name for parallel structure and formality. “Pre-operational” was corrected to “preoperational” to match the standard spelling used in academic psychology. |
||
| (17 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown) | |||
Line 4:
'''Piaget's theory of cognitive development''', or his [[genetic epistemology]], is a comprehensive theory about the nature and development of human [[intelligence]]. It was originated by the Swiss [[developmental psychologist]] [[Jean Piaget]] (1896–1980). The theory deals with the [[epistemology|nature of knowledge]] itself and how humans gradually come to acquire, construct, and use it.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/wileyse/cognitive_development/0|title=Cognitive Development - Encyclopedia of Special Education: A Reference for the Education of Children, Adolescents, and Adults with Disabilities and Other Exceptional Individuals - Credo Reference|website=search.credoreference.com}}</ref> Piaget's theory is mainly known as a [[Developmental stage theories|developmental stage theory]].
In 1919, while working at the Alfred Binet Laboratory School in [[Paris]], Piaget "was intrigued by the fact that children of different ages made different kinds of mistakes while solving problems".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Franzoi |first=Stephen L. |title=Essentials of Psychology |publisher=BVT Publishing |year=2014 |isbn=9781618826947 |edition=5th |___location=Redding, CA |pages=119}}</ref> His experience and observations at the [[Alfred Binet]] Laboratory were the beginnings of his theory of cognitive development.<ref>{{Citation|last=Piaget|first=Jean|title=Jean Piaget.|date=1952|url=http://content.apa.org/books/11154-011|work=A History of Psychology in Autobiography, Vol IV.|pages=237–256|editor-last=Boring|editor-first=Edwin G.|place=Worcester|publisher=Clark University Press|language=en|doi=10.1037/11154-011|access-date=2021-02-28|editor2-last=Werner|editor2-first=Heinz|editor3-last=Langfeld|editor3-first=Herbert S.|editor4-last=Yerkes|editor4-first=Robert M.|url-access=subscription}}</ref>
He believed that children of different ages made different mistakes because of the "quality rather than quantity" of their intelligence.<ref name=McLeod/> Piaget proposed four stages to describe the
To Piaget, [[cognitive development]] was a progressive reorganisation of mental processes resulting from biological maturation and environmental experience. He believed that children construct an understanding of the world around them, experience discrepancies between what they already know and what they discover in their environment, then adjust their ideas accordingly.<ref name=McLeod>{{cite web|last=McLeod|first=S. A.|title=Jean Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development|url=http://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html|website=www.simplypsychology.org|access-date=18 September 2012}}</ref> Moreover, Piaget claimed that cognitive development is at the centre of the human organism, and language is contingent on knowledge and understanding acquired through cognitive development.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://search.credoreference.com/content/entry/edinburghthinkl/jean_piaget/0|title=JEAN PIAGET - Key Thinkers in Linguistics and the Philosophy of Language - Credo Reference|website=search.credoreference.com}}</ref> Piaget's earlier work received the greatest attention.
Line 17:
''Operative intelligence'' is the active aspect of intelligence. It involves all actions, overt or covert, undertaken in order to follow, recover, or anticipate the transformations of the objects or persons of interest.<ref name="Furth, H. G. 1977">Furth, H. G. (1977). The operative and figurative aspects of knowledge in Piaget's theory. B. A. Geber (Ed.). London, England: Routledge & Kegan Paul.</ref> ''Figurative intelligence'' is the more or less static aspect of intelligence, involving all means of representation used to retain in mind the states (i.e., successive forms, shapes, or locations) that intervene between transformations. That is, it involves [[perception]], [[imitation]], [[mental image]]ry, drawing, and language.<ref name="go.galegroup.com1">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3407100185&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=b71fd57e9d31971ea40106f27e199015|title=Piaget, Jean (1896-1980)|first=Howard E.|last=Gruber|date=30 November 2003|journal=Learning and Memory}}</ref> Therefore, the figurative aspects of intelligence derive their meaning from the operative aspects of intelligence, because states cannot exist independently of the transformations that interconnect them. Piaget stated that the figurative or the representational aspects of intelligence are subservient to its operative and dynamic aspects, and therefore, that understanding essentially derives from the operative aspect of intelligence.<ref name="Furth, H. G. 1977"/>
At any time, operative intelligence frames how the world is understood and it changes if understanding is not successful. Piaget stated that this process of understanding and change involves two basic functions: ''assimilation'' and ''accommodation''.<ref name="go.galegroup.com1"/><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3406000055&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=174d9bd2c42c2e8475446e5c13301c8d|title=Assimilation|date=30 November 2000|journal=The Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3466300066&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=ed09320c311b0c0e856cb2ce7c4cd810|title=Assimilation|first=Jill Englebright|last=Fox|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Human Development|volume=1|doi=10.4135/9781412952484.n54|isbn=9781412904759|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3403200491&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=8de3eeb14aba519a97e788201dd42234|title=Piaget, Jean (1896–1980)|first=DAVID|last=ELKIND|date=30 November 2001|journal=Encyclopedia of Education|volume=5}}</ref>
===Assimilation and accommodation===
Through his study of the field of education, Piaget focused on two processes, which he named
Various [[teaching method|teaching methods]] have been developed based on Piaget's insights that call for the use of questioning and [[Inquiry education|inquiry-based education]] to help learners more blatantly face the sorts of contradictions to their pre-existing schemas that are conducive to learning.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Klein | first1 = Reuven Chaim | year = 2023 | title = The Passover Seder as an Exercise in Piagetian Education Theory
| journal = Religious Education | volume = 118 | issue = 4| pages = 312-324 | url= https://hcommons.org/deposits/view/hc:61280/CONTENT/the-passover-seder-as-an-exercise-in-piagetian-education-theory.pdf | doi=10.1080/00344087.2023.2228189 }}</ref>
Piaget believed that the human brain has been programmed through [[human evolution|evolution]] to bring equilibrium, which is what he believed ultimately influences structures by the internal and external processes through assimilation and accommodation.<ref name=Stassen_p44 />
Piaget's understanding was that assimilation and accommodation cannot exist without the other.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Block | first1 = Jack | year = 1982 | title = Assimilation, accommodation, and the dynamics of personality development | journal = Child Development | volume = 53 | issue = 2| pages = 281–295 | doi=10.2307/1128971| jstor = 1128971 }}</ref> They are two sides of a coin. To assimilate an object into an existing mental schema, one first needs to take into account or accommodate to the particularities of this object to a certain extent. For instance, to recognize (assimilate) an apple as an apple, one must first focus (accommodate) on the contour of this object. To do this, one needs to roughly recognize the size of the object. Development increases the balance, or equilibration, between these two functions. When in balance with each other, assimilation and accommodation generate mental schemas of the operative intelligence. When one function dominates over the other, they generate representations which belong to figurative intelligence.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://etec512learningconference-piaget.weebly.com/theory.html|title=Theory|access-date=15 March 2017}}</ref>
Line 26 ⟶ 31:
===Cognitive equilibration===
Piaget agreed with most other developmental psychologists in that there are three very important factors that are attributed to development: maturation, experience, and the social environment. But where his theory differs involves his addition of a fourth factor, equilibration, which "refers to the organism's attempt to keep its cognitive schemes in balance".<ref>{{Citation |last1=Bjorklund |first1=David F. |last2=Causey |first2=Kayla B. |year=2018 |section=Social construction of mind |title=Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences |edition=6th |pages=65–91 |publisher=[[SAGE Publishing]] |isbn=978-1506334356}}</ref>
<ref>{{Citation |last1=Bjorklund |first1=David F. |last2=Causey |first2=Kayla B. |year=2018 |section=Thinking in symbols |title=Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences |edition=6th |pages=147–198 |publisher=[[SAGE Publishing]] |isbn=978-1506334356}}</ref><ref>{{Citation |last=Miller |first=Brittany |date=June 2020 |title=Do Children Learn on Their Own or With Others? |work=You Don’t Say? Developmental Science Offers Answers to Questions About How Nurture Matters, Chapter 17 |publisher=Presswords}}</ref> Also see Piaget,<ref>{{Citation |last=Piaget |first=Jean |year=1977 |title=The Development of Thought: Equilibration of Cognitive Structures |publisher=University of California}}</ref> and Boom's detailed account.<ref>{{Citation |last=Boom |first=J. |year=2009 |title=Piaget on Equilibration |work=The Cambridge Companion to Piaget, Chapter 6 |pages=132–149 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |doi=10.1017/CCOL9780521898584.006}}</ref>
Equilibration is the motivational element that guides cognitive development. As humans, we have a biological need to make sense of the things we encounter in every aspect of our world in order to muster a greater understanding of it, and therefore, to flourish in it. This is where the concept of equilibration comes into play. If a child is confronted with information that does not fit into his or her previously held schemes, disequilibrium is said to occur. This, as one would imagine, is unsatisfactory to the child, so he or she will try to fix it. The incongruence will be fixed in one of three ways. The child will either ignore the newly discovered information, assimilate the information into a preexisting scheme, or accommodate the information by modifying a different scheme. Using any of these methods will return the child to a state of equilibrium, however, depending on the information being presented to the child, that state of equilibrium is not likely to be permanent.
Line 49 ⟶ 53:
Children learn that they are separate from the environment. They can think about aspects of the environment, even though these may be outside the reach of the child's senses. In this stage, according to Piaget, the development of ''[[object permanence]]'' is one of the most important accomplishments.<ref name=Stassen_p44 /> Object permanence is a child's understanding that an object continues to exist even though they cannot see or hear it.<ref name="ReferenceC"/> [[Peekaboo|Peek-a-boo]] is a game in which children who have yet to fully develop object permanence respond to sudden hiding and revealing of a face. By the end of the sensorimotor period, children develop a permanent sense of self and object and will quickly lose interest in Peek-a-boo.<ref name="Santrockk"/>
[[Jean Piaget|Piaget]] divided the sensorimotor stage into six sub-stages
{| class="wikitable"
Line 101 ⟶ 105:
[[Egocentrism]] occurs when a child is unable to distinguish between their own perspective and that of another person. Children tend to stick to their own viewpoint, rather than consider the view of others. Indeed, they are not even aware that such a concept as "different viewpoints" exists.<ref>Piaget, A Child's Conception of Space, Norton Edition, 1967; p. 178</ref> Egocentrism can be seen in an experiment performed by Piaget and Swiss developmental psychologist [[Bärbel Inhelder]], known as the [[three mountain problem]]. In this experiment, three views of a mountain are shown to the child, who is asked what a traveling doll would see at the various angles. The child will consistently describe what they can see from the position from which they are seated, regardless of the angle from which they are asked to take the doll's perspective. Egocentrism would also cause a child to believe, "I like ''[[The Lion Guard]]'', so the high school student next door must like ''The Lion Guard'', too."
{{Anchor|Artificialism}}Similar to preoperational children's egocentric thinking is their structuring of a [[Causality|cause and effect]] relationships. Piaget coined the term "precausal thinking" to describe the way in which preoperational children use their own existing ideas or views, like in egocentrism, to explain cause-and-effect relationships. Three main concepts of causality as displayed by children in the preoperational stage include: [[animism]], artificialism and [[Transduction (psychology)|transductive]] reasoning.<ref name="Rathus 2006">{{cite book|last=Rathus|first=Spencer A.|title=Childhood: voyages in development|url=https://archive.org/details/childhoodvoyages0000rath|url-access=registration|year=2006|publisher=[[Thomson/Wadsworth]]|___location=Belmont, CA|isbn=9780495004455}}</ref>
Animism is the belief that inanimate objects are capable of actions and have lifelike qualities. An example could be a child believing that the sidewalk was mad and made them fall down, or that the stars twinkle in the sky because they are happy. Artificialism refers to the belief that environmental characteristics can be attributed to human actions or interventions. For example, a child might say that it is windy outside because someone is blowing very hard, or the clouds are white because someone painted them that color. Finally, precausal thinking is categorized by transductive reasoning. Transductive reasoning is when a child fails to understand the true relationships between cause and effect.<ref name="Santrock8"/><ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.columbuscityschools.org/lee/pioneer/stage2.htm | title=Preoperational Stage | access-date=February 2, 2013 | url-status=dead | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130728114723/http://www.columbuscityschools.org/lee/pioneer/stage2.htm | archive-date=July 28, 2013 }}</ref> Unlike [[Deductive reasoning|deductive]] or [[inductive reasoning]] (general to specific, or specific to general), transductive reasoning refers to when a child reasons from specific to specific, drawing a relationship between two separate events that are otherwise unrelated. For example, if a child hears the dog bark and then a balloon popped, the child would conclude that because the dog barked, the balloon popped.
Line 143 ⟶ 147:
* ''Identity'': One feature of concrete operational thought is the understanding that objects have qualities that do not change even if the object is altered in some way. For instance, mass of an object does not change by rearranging it. A piece of chalk is still chalk even when the piece is broken in two.
* ''Reversibility'': The child learns that some things that have been changed can be returned to their original state. Water can be frozen and then thawed to become liquid again; however, eggs cannot be unscrambled. Children use reversibility a lot in mathematical problems such as: 2 + 3 = 5 and 5 – 3 = 2.
* ''Conservation'': The ability to understand that the quantity (mass, weight volume) of something doesn't change due to the change of appearance.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Elkind |first=David |date=June 1961 |title=Children's Discovery of the Conservation of Mass, Weight, and Volume: Piaget Replication Study II |url=http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00221325.1961.10534372 |journal=The Journal of Genetic Psychology |language=en |volume=98 |issue=2 |pages=219–227 |doi=10.1080/00221325.1961.10534372 |pmid=13726387 |issn=0022-1325|url-access=subscription }}</ref>
* ''Decentration'': The ability to focus on more
* ''Seriation'': Arranging items along a quantitative dimension, such as length or weight, in a methodical way is now demonstrated by the concrete operational child. For example, they can logically arrange a series of different-sized sticks in order by length. Younger children not yet in the concrete stage approach a similar task in a haphazard way.
Line 177 ⟶ 181:
==Postulated physical mechanisms underlying schemes, schemas, and stages==
First note the distinction between 'schemes' (analogous to 1D lists of action-instructions, e.g. leading to separate pen-strokes), and figurative 'schemas' (aka 'schemata', akin to 2D drawings/sketches or virtual 3D models); see [[Schema (psychology)|schema]]. This distinction (often overlooked by translators) is emphasized by Piaget & Inhelder,<ref>Piaget, J., & B.Inhelder (1966/1971). Mental Imagery in the Child. Routledge & Kegan Paul: London</ref><ref>Piaget, J., & B.Inhelder (1968/1973). Memory and Intelligence. Routledge & Kegan Paul: London.</ref> and others<ref>Furth H.G. (1969) ''Piaget and Knowledge: Theoretical Foundations'' Prentice Hall.</ref> + <ref>Traill, R.R. (2008), Thinking by Molecule Synapse or Both? - From Piaget's Schema to the Selecting/Editing of ncRNA, ''Gen. Sci. J.'', https://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers/View/891</ref>(Appendix p. 21-22); also in an earlier (1958) Psychology dictionary.<ref>English H.B. and English A.C. (1958) ''A Comprehensive Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms'' Longmans</ref>
In 1967, Piaget considered the possibility of [[RNA]] molecules as likely embodiments of his still-abstract schemes (which he promoted as units of action) — though he did not come to any firm conclusion.<ref>Piaget, J. (1967/1971). ''Biologie et connaissance: Essai sur les relations entre les régulations organiques et les processus cognitifs''. Gallimard: Paris — ''Biology and Knowledge''. Chicago University Press; and Edinburgh University Press.</ref> At that time, due to work such as that of Swedish biochemist Holger Hydén, RNA concentrations had, indeed, been shown to correlate with learning.<ref>For example: {{cite journal |last1=Hydén |first1=H. |last2=Egyhazi |first2=E. |title=Nuclear RNA changes of nerve cells during a learning experiment in rats. |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |date=1962 |volume=48 |issue=8 |pages=1366–1373|doi=10.1073/pnas.48.8.1366 |pmid=14450327 |pmc=220960 |bibcode=1962PNAS...48.1366H |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>Egyhazi, E., & H.Hydén (1961). "Experimentally induced changes in the base composition of the ribonucleic acids of isolated nerve cells and their oligodendroglial cells". ''J.biophys. biochem. Cytol.'', '''10''', 403-410.</ref>
Line 194 ⟶ 198:
==Relation to psychometric theories of intelligence==
Researchers have linked Piaget's theory to Cattell and Horn's [[Fluid and crystallized intelligence|theory of fluid and crystallized abilities]].<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Papalia|first1=D.|last2=Fitzgerald|first2=J.|last3=Hooper|first3=F. H.|year=1971|title=Piagetian Theory and the Aging Process: Extensions and Speculations|journal=The International Journal of Aging and Human Development|volume=2|pages=3–20|doi=10.2190/AG.2.1.b|s2cid=143590129}}</ref><ref name="Schonfeld
Piaget's theory also aligns with another psychometric theory, namely the psychometric theory of [[G factor (psychometrics)|''g'']], general intelligence. Piaget designed a number of tasks to assess hypotheses arising from his theory. The tasks were not intended to measure individual differences and they have no equivalent in [[Psychometrics|psychometric]] intelligence tests. Notwithstanding the different research traditions in which psychometric tests and Piagetian tasks were developed, the correlations between the two types of measures have been found to be consistently positive and generally moderate in magnitude. ''g'' is thought to underlie performance on the two types of tasks. It has been shown that it is possible to construct a battery consisting of Piagetian tasks that is as good a measure of [[G factor (psychometrics)|''g'']] as standard IQ tests.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Humphreys | first1 = L.G. | last2 = Rich | first2 = S.A. | last3 = Davey | first3 = T.C. | year = 1985 | title = A Piagetian Test of General Intelligence | journal = Developmental Psychology | volume = 21 | issue = 5| pages = 872–877 | doi=10.1037/0012-1649.21.5.872}}</ref><ref>Lautrey, J. (2002). Is there a general factor of cognitive development? In Sternberg, R.J. & Grigorenko, E.L. (Eds.), ''The general factor of intelligence: How general is it?'' Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Weinberg | first1 = R.A. | year = 1989 | title = Intelligence and IQ. Landmark Issues and Great Debates | journal = American Psychologist | volume = 44 | issue = 2| pages = 98–104 | doi=10.1037/0003-066x.44.2.98}}</ref>
==Challenges to Piagetian stage theory==
Piagetian accounts of development have been challenged on several grounds. First, as Piaget himself noted, development does not always progress in the smooth manner his theory seems to predict. ''Décalage'', or progressive forms of cognitive developmental progression in a specific ___domain, suggest that the stage model is, at best, a useful approximation.<ref name="go.galegroup.com2">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3466300160&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=b6bd1ae3a4e93016b772396b5848a349|title=Concrete Operational Period|first=Karen E.|last=Singer-Freeman|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Human Development|volume=1|doi=10.4135/9781412952484.n148|isbn=9781412904759|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Furthermore, studies have found that children may be able to learn concepts and capability of complex reasoning that supposedly represented in more advanced stages with relative ease (Lourenço & Machado, 1996, p. 145).<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Lourenço | first1 = O. | last2 = Machado | first2 = A. | year = 1996 | title = In defense of Piaget's theory: A reply to 10 common criticisms | journal = Psychological Review | volume = 103 | issue = 1| pages = 143–164 | doi = 10.1037/0033-295X.103.1.143 | s2cid = 32390745 }}</ref><ref>[http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/psych406-5.3.2.pdf Kay C. Wood, Harlan Smith, and Daurice Grossniklaus. "Piaget's Stages of Cognitive Development". pp. 6] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130930233046/http://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/psych406-5.3.2.pdf |date=2013-09-30 }} Retrieved May 29, 2012</ref> More broadly, Piaget's theory is "[[Domain-general learning|___domain general]]," predicting that cognitive maturation occurs concurrently across different domains of knowledge (such as mathematics, logic, and understanding of [[physics]] or language).<ref name="go.galegroup.com2"/> Piaget did not take into account variability in a child's performance notably how a child can differ in sophistication across several domains.
Piaget’s theory has been challenged through research studies on a child’s cognitive development such as the habituation paradigm. Many infants possess “core knowledge” which allow them to have an innate understanding for how things around them work. Infants were found to have coherence (objects move in one piece), continuity (objects follow continuous paths), and contact (objects do not move without being touched). In an experiment conducted by Renée Baillargeon, three month old infants were tested to see if they were surprised when a board fell downward and appeared to pass through a ball hidden behind it.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Baillargeon |first=Renée |date=1987 |title=Object permanence in 3½- and 4½-month-old infants. |url=https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0012-1649.23.5.655 |journal=Developmental Psychology |language=en |volume=23 |issue=5 |pages=655–664 |doi=10.1037/0012-1649.23.5.655 |issn=1939-0599 |via=American Psychological Association|url-access=subscription }}</ref> These infants were shocked and confused, despite their ages not aligning with the eight months proposed by Piaget. Thus, it was found that the way in which children learn about the world is not strictly confined through different age groups.
During the 1980s and 1990s, cognitive developmentalists were influenced by [[Psychological nativism|"neo-nativist"]] and [[evolutionary psychology]] ideas. These ideas de-emphasized ___domain general theories and emphasized [[___domain specificity]] or [[modularity of mind]].<ref name="Callaghan, T. C. 2005 pp. 204-209">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX1311100053&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=c822fe0523f5b1258756f6e7855acc8d|title=Cognitive Development Beyond Infancy|first=Tara C.|last=Callaghan|date=30 November 2004|journal=The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Child Development}}</ref> Modularity implies that different cognitive faculties may be largely independent of one another, and thus develop according to quite different timetables, which are "influenced by real world experiences".<ref name="Callaghan, T. C. 2005 pp. 204-209"/> In this vein, some cognitive developmentalists argued that, rather than being ___domain general learners, children come equipped with ___domain specific theories, sometimes referred to as "core knowledge," which allows them to break into learning within that ___domain. For example, even young infants appear to be sensitive to some predictable regularities in the movement and interactions of objects (for example, an object cannot pass through another object), or in human behavior (for example, a hand repeatedly reaching for an object has that object, not just a particular path of motion), as it becomes the building block of which more elaborate knowledge is constructed.
Line 205 ⟶ 211:
Piaget's theory has been said to undervalue the influence that culture has on cognitive development. Piaget demonstrates that a child goes through several stages of cognitive development and come to conclusions on their own, however, a child's sociocultural environment plays an important part in their cognitive development. Social interaction teaches the child about the world and helps them develop through the cognitive stages, which Piaget neglected to consider.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Kail|first1=Robert|title=Children and Their Development|url=https://archive.org/details/childrentheirdev0004kail|url-access=registration|date=2007|publisher=Pearson|isbn=9780131949119|edition=4}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://ejournal1.com/journals_n/1433324999.pdf|title=Assan, E. A., & Sarfo, J. O. (2015). Piagetian conservation tasks in Ghanaian children: The role of geographical ___location, gender and age differences. European Journal of Contemporary Education, 12(2), 137-149.|access-date=2023-03-05|archive-date=2018-06-02|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180602041903/http://ejournal1.com/journals_n/1433324999.pdf|url-status=bot: unknown}}</ref>
More recent work from a newer dynamic systems approach has strongly challenged some of the basic presumptions of the "core knowledge" school that Piaget suggested. Dynamic systems approaches harken to modern [[Neuroscience|neuroscientific]] research that was not available to Piaget when he was constructing his theory.<ref name="Bjorklund 2288–2302">{{Cite journal|last=Bjorklund|first=David F.|date=1 November 2018|title=A Metatheory for Cognitive Development (or "Piaget is Dead" Revisited)|url=http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/cdev.13019|journal=Child Development|language=en|volume=89|issue=6|pages=2288–2302|doi=10.1111/cdev.13019|pmid=29336015|via=|url-access=subscription}}</ref> This brought new light into research in psychology in which new techniques such as brain imaging provided new understanding to cognitive development.<ref name="Bjorklund 2288–2302"/> One important finding is that ___domain-specific knowledge is constructed as children develop and integrate knowledge. This enables the ___domain to improve the accuracy of the knowledge as well as organization of memories.<ref name="Callaghan, T. C. 2005 pp. 204-209"/> However, this suggests more of a "smooth integration" of learning and development than either Piaget, or his neo-nativist critics, had envisioned. Additionally, some psychologists, such as [[Lev Vygotsky]] and [[Jerome Bruner]], thought differently from Piaget, suggesting that language was more important for cognition development than Piaget implied.<ref name="Callaghan, T. C. 2005 pp. 204-209"/><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3406000105&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=650268d1759955de0b9432be0e28ba5f|title=Bruner, Jerome S.|date=30 November 2000|journal=The Gale Encyclopedia of Psychology}}</ref>
==Post-Piagetian and neo-Piagetian stages==
Line 212 ⟶ 218:
* The [[neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development]], advanced by Robbie Case, [[Andreas Demetriou]], Graeme S. Halford, [[Kurt W. Fischer]], [[Michael Commons|Michael Lamport Commons]], and Juan Pascual-Leone, attempted to integrate Piaget's theory with cognitive and differential theories of cognitive organization and development. Their aim was to better account for the cognitive factors of development and for intra-individual and inter-individual differences in cognitive development. They suggested that development along Piaget's stages is due to increasing [[working memory]] capacity and processing efficiency by "biological maturation".<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3027800184&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=5fee96b9c6312e2ec80a2b957d08d51e|title=Neo-Piagetian Theories of Development|date=30 November 2008|journal=Psychology of Classroom Learning|volume=2}}</ref> Moreover, [[Andreas Demetriou|Demetriou]]'s theory ascribes an important role to hypercognitive processes of "self-monitoring, self-recording, self-evaluation, and self-regulation", and it recognizes the operation of several relatively autonomous domains of thought (Demetriou, 1998; Demetriou, Mouyi, Spanoudis, 2010; Demetriou, 2003, p. 153).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.adesignmedia.com/OnlineResearch/sp_Mind%20Self%20and%20Personality.pdf|title=Demetriou, A. (2003). Mind, self, and personality: Dynamic interactions from late childhood to early adulthood. Journal of Adult development, 10(3), 151–171.|access-date=2014-10-01|archive-date=2016-03-04|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304173859/http://www.adesignmedia.com/OnlineResearch/sp_Mind%20Self%20and%20Personality.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>
* Piaget's theory stops at the formal operational stage, but other researchers have observed the thinking of adults is more nuanced than formal operational thought. This fifth stage has been named [[postformal thought|post formal thought]] or operation.<ref>Jan D. Sinnott "The Development of Logic in Adulthood: Postformal Thought and Its Applications" (Plenum Press 1998)</ref><ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3466300423&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=c6e23814559096bdcd16fc9068c727ee|title=Middle Adulthood|first=David J.|last=Johnson|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Human Development|volume=2|doi=10.4135/9781412952484.n411|isbn=9781412904759|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Post formal stages have been proposed. [[Michael Commons]] presented evidence for four post formal stages in the [[model of hierarchical complexity]]: systematic, meta-systematic, [[paradigm]]atic, and cross-paradigmatic (Commons & Richards, 2003, p. 206–208; Oliver, 2004, p. 31).<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dareassociation.org/Papers/GWOF_A_330277%20Introduction.pdf|title=Commons, M. L. (2008). Introduction to the model of hierarchical complexity and its relationship to postformal action. World Futures, 64(5–7), 305–320.}}</ref><ref name="books.google.com">{{cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=56y91WtpwCIC&pg=PA199|title=Handbook of Adult Development|first1=Jack|last1=Demick|first2=Carrie|last2=Andreoletti|date=31 January 2003|publisher=Springer Science & Business Media|via=Google Books|isbn=9780306467585}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.dareassociation.org/Carl.Oliver_Dissertation_2004.pdf|title=Oliver, C. R. (2004). Impact of catastrophe on pivotal national leaders' vision statements: Correspondences and discrepancies in moral reasoning, explanatory style, and rumination. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fielding Graduate Institute.|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160303174802/http://dareassociation.org/Carl.Oliver_Dissertation_2004.pdf|archive-date=2016-03-03}}</ref> There are many theorists, however, who have criticized "post formal thinking," because the concept lacks both theoretical and empirical verification. The term "integrative thinking" has been suggested for use instead.<ref name="Kallio, E pp. 785 - 801">Kallio, E. Integrative thinking is the key: an evaluation of current research into the development of thinking in adults. Theory & Psychology, 21 Issue 6 December 2011 pp. 785 – 801</ref><ref name="Kallio, E. 1991">{{cite journal | last1 = Kallio | first1 = E. | last2 = Helkama | first2 = K. | year = 1991 | title = Formal operations and postformal reasoning: A replication | journal = [[Scandinavian Journal of Psychology]] | volume = 32 | issue = 1| pages = 18–21 | doi = 10.1111/j.1467-9450.1991.tb00848.x }}</ref><ref name="Kallio, E 1995">{{cite journal | last1 = Kallio | first1 = E | year = 1995 | title = Systematic reasoning: Formal or postformal cognition? | journal = Journal of Adult Development | volume = 2 | issue = 3| pages = 187–192 | doi = 10.1007/bf02265716 | s2cid = 145091949 }}</ref><ref name="ReferenceA">Kramer, D. Post-Formal Operations? A Need for Further Conceptualization
Hum Dev 1983;26:91–105</ref><ref name="ReferenceB">Marchand, H. The Genetic Epistemologist Volume 29, Number 3</ref>
Line 218 ⟶ 224:
* A "sentential" stage, said to occur before the early preoperational stage, has been proposed by Fischer, Biggs and Biggs, Commons, and Richards.<ref>Commons, M. L., & Richards, F. A. (1984a). A general model of stage theory. In M. L. Commons, F. A. Richards, & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations: Vol. 1. Late adolescent and adult cognitive development (pp. 120–140). New York: Praeger.</ref><ref>Commons, M. L., & Richards, F. A. (1984b). Applying the general stage model. In M. L. Commons, F. A. Richards, & C. Armon (Eds.), Beyond formal operations: Vol. 1. Late adolescent and adult cognitive development (pp. 141–157). New York: Praeger.</ref>
* [[Jerome Bruner]] has expressed views on cognitive development in a "pragmatic orientation" in which humans actively use knowledge for practical applications, such as problem solving and understanding reality.<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3466300119&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=d850de297c4ec233b0c5cc4eaf6bafb7|title=Bruner, Jerome (1915–)|first=David|last=Bakhurst|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Human Development|volume=1|doi=10.4135/9781412952484.n107|isbn=9781412904759|url-access=subscription}}</ref>
* [[Michael Commons|Michael Lamport Commons]] proposed the [[model of hierarchical complexity]] (MHC) in two dimensions: horizontal complexity and vertical complexity (Commons & Richards, 2003, p. 205).<ref name="books.google.com"/><ref>Commons, M. L., & Pekker, A. (2008). Presenting the formal theory of hierarchical complexity. World Futures: Journal of General Evolution 65(1–3), 375–382.</ref><ref>Commons, M. L., Gane-McCalla, R., Barker C. D., Li, E. Y. (in press). The Model of Hierarchical Complexity as a measurement system. Journal of Adult Development.</ref>
* [[Kieran Egan (educationist)|Kieran Egan]] has proposed five [[The Educated Mind|stages of understanding]]. These are "somatic", "mythic", "romantic", "philosophic", and "ironic". These stages are developed through cognitive tools such as "stories", "binary oppositions", "fantasy" and "rhyme, rhythm, and meter" to enhance memorization to develop a long-lasting learning capacity.<ref name="Petersen, N. J. 2006 pp. 122-127">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3469600091&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=26b7af136b0552cd6503dd1d719701b3|title=Child Development Theories|first=Naomi Jeffery|last=Petersen|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Educational Leadership and Administration|volume=1}}</ref>
* [[Lawrence Kohlberg]] developed three [[Kohlberg's stages of moral development|stages of moral development]]: "[[Preconventional morality|Preconventional]]", "Conventional" and "Postconventional".<ref name="Petersen, N. J. 2006 pp. 122-127"/><ref name="Voorhis, P. V. 2010 pp. 508-513">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX1923700151&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=e4752d673a01c82f3d23867cde7a5c46|title=Kohlberg, Lawrence: Moral Development Theory|first=Patricia Van|last=Voorhis|date=30 November 2009|journal=Encyclopedia of Criminological Theory|volume=1}}</ref> Each level is composed of two orientation stages, with a total of six orientation stages: (1) "Punishment-Obedience", (2) "Instrumental Relativist", (3) "Good Boy-Nice Girl", (4) "Law and Order", (5) "Social Contract", and (6) "[[Categorical imperative|Universal Ethical Principle]]".<ref name="Petersen, N. J. 2006 pp. 122-127"/><ref name="Voorhis, P. V. 2010 pp. 508-513"/>
* [[Andreas Demetriou]] has expressed [[neo-Piagetian theories of cognitive development]].
* [[Loevinger's stages of ego development|Jane Loevinger's stages of ego development]] occur through "an evolution of stages".<ref name="Forbes, S. A. 2006 pp. 442-443">{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3466300230&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=b35c3cffb1761177fef91a14fa348d28|title=Ego Development|first=Sean A.|last=Forbes|date=30 November 2005|journal=Encyclopedia of Human Development|volume=1|doi=10.4135/9781412952484.n218|isbn=9781412904759|url-access=subscription}}</ref> "First is the Presocial Stage followed by the Symbiotic Stage, Impulsive Stage, Self-Protective Stage, Conformist Stage, Self-Aware Level: Transition from Conformist to Conscientious Stage, Individualistic Level: Transition from Conscientious to the Autonomous Stage, Conformist Stage, and Integrated Stage".<ref name="Forbes, S. A. 2006 pp. 442-443"/>
* [[Ken Wilber]] has incorporated Piaget's theory in his [[Multidisciplinary approach|multidisciplinary]] field of [[Integral theory (Ken Wilber)|integral theory]]. The human consciousness is structured in hierarchical order and organized in "holon" chains or "[[great chain of being]]", which are based on the level of spiritual and psychological development.<ref>{{cite journal|url=http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CCX3042600539&v=2.1&it=r&p=GVRL&sw=w&asid=b4fd045913628a8f86d9316598e825e9|title=Wilber, Ken|date=30 November 2009|journal=Encyclopedia of Psychology and Religion}}</ref>
* Oliver Kress published a model that connected Piaget's theory of development and [[Abraham Maslow]]'s concept of [[self-actualization]].<ref>{{cite journal|title=A new approach to cognitive development: ontogenesis and the process of initiation|first=Oliver|last=Kress|date=1993|journal=Evolution and Cognition|volume=2|number=4|pages=319–332|url=https://www.academia.edu/663726|access-date=15 March 2017}}</ref> [[File:MaslowsHierarchyOfNeeds.svg|thumb|Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs]]
Line 238 ⟶ 244:
{{Human psychological development}}
[[Category:Cognitive psychology]]
| |||