The construction of reality in the child.

Piaget, Jean

doi:10.1037/11168-000

Cited by 4,185 publications

(2,921 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

2,740

Contrasting

Unclassified

108

Order By: Relevance

“…Concretely, developmental changes in infants' performance in the Piagetian A-not-B task has been used as a measure of the developing object concept (Piaget, 1954), improvements in infants' representation of space (e.g., Acredolo, 1985;Bremner, 1978;Bremner & Bryant, 1977), maturational changes in pre-frontal cortex (e.g., Diamond, 1990a;Diamond, 1990b;Diamond & Goldman-Rakic, 1989), and improvements in infants' memory for objects (e.g., Munakata, 1998;Munakata, McClelland, Johnson & Siegler, 1997), among others. By contrast, performance in the two spatial recall tasks we simulate has been linked to how children use long-term spatial memories and geometric spatial categories to remember locations (e.g., Huttenlocher, Newcombe & Sandberg, 1994;Schutte & Spencer, 2002;Spencer & Hund, 2003).…”

Section: Development In the Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Simmering¹,

Schutte²,

Spencer³

2008

Brain Research

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Within cognitive neuroscience, computational models are designed to provide insights into the organization of behavior while adhering to neural principles. These models should provide sufficient specificity to generate novel predictions while maintaining the generality needed to capture behavior across tasks and/or time scales. This paper presents one such model, the Dynamic Field Theory (DFT) of spatial cognition, showing new simulations that provide a demonstration proof that the theory generalizes across developmental changes in performance in four tasks-the Piagetian A-not-B task, a sandbox version of the A-not-B task, a canonical spatial recall task, and a position discrimination task. Model simulations demonstrate that the DFT can accomplish both specificity-generating novel, testable predictions-and generality-spanning multiple tasks across development with a relatively simple developmental hypothesis. Critically, the DFT achieves generality across tasks and time scales with no modification to its basic structure and with a strong commitment to neural principles. The only change necessary to capture development in the model was an increase in the precision of the tuning of receptive fields as well as an increase in the precision of local excitatory interactions among neurons in the model. These small quantitative changes were sufficient to move the model through a set of quantitative and qualitative behavioral changes that span the age range from 8 months to 6 years and into adulthood. We conclude by considering how the DFT is positioned in the literature, the challenges on the horizon for our framework, and how a dynamic field approach can yield new insights into development from a computational cognitive neuroscience perspective.

show abstract

Section: Development In the Dftmentioning

confidence: 99%

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Simmering¹,

Schutte²,

Spencer³

2008

Brain Research

114

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It is not until the object is localized that they can perceive object limits such as form, surface and color (Spelke and Hermer 1996;Jusczyk, Johnson et al 1999;Johnson and Mason 2002). Piaget (1954) discovered that six-month-olds succeeded in grasping a small object hanging in the air, but failed when the small object was placed on a larger object. Thus, infants perceive an object when it is separated from other objects and when it is placed at another depth.…”

Section: Development Of Shape Perceptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

116

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined 14-to 26-month-old infants' understanding of the spatial relationships between objects and apertures in an object manipulation task. The task was to insert objects with various cross-sections (circular, square, rectangular, ellipsoid, and triangular) into fitting apertures. A successful solution required the infant to mentally rotate the object to be fit into the aperture and use that information to plan the action. The object was presented standing up in half of the trials; in the other half, it was lying down. The results showed that infants solved the problem consistently from age 22 months and that a successful solution was associated with appropriate preadjustments before the hand arrived with the block to the aperture. No sex differences were found.

show abstract

“…In short, to the extent that the behavior is languagelike, our model should apply. The model would not, for example, be expected to apply directly to simple behavioral perseveration, such as that shown by infants in search tasks (Piaget, 1954), because the relevant responses--looking for an object in one or another location--are not being generated as part of a system with languagelike dependencies. Moreover, there is no clear sense of what would constitute an anticipation.…”

Section: Applications To Nonlinguistic Domains?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Language production and serial order: A functional analysis and a model.

Dell¹,

Burger²,

Svec³

1997

Psychological Review

367

399

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In speech production, previously spoken and upcoming words can impinge on the word currently being said, resulting in perseverations (e.g., "beef needle soup" ) and anticipations (e.g., "cuff of coffee" ). These errors reveal the extent to which the language-production system is focused on the past, the present, and the future and therefore are informative about how the system deals with serial order. This article offers a functional analysis of serial order in language and develops a general formal model. The centerpiece of the model is a prediction that the fraction of serial-order errors that are anticipatory, as opposed to perseveratory, can be closely predicted by overall error rate. The lower the error rate, the more anticipatory the errors are, regardless of the factors influencing error rate. The model is successfully applied to experimental and natural error data dealing with the effects of practice, speech rate, individual differences, age, and brain damage.More than 45 years ago, Lashley ( 1951 ) directed the attention of psychologists to the problem of serial order. Ordered behavior, he wrote, cannot simply be the product of associations between elementary responses. Instead, there must be a hierarchically organized plan or schema that is separate from the responses and yet determines their order. Although it took some time for Lashley's paper to be appreciated (Bruce, 1994), his insights are now acknowledged to be central to theory in memory (e.g., Murdock, 1974), psycholinguisties (e.g., Levelt, 1989;MacKay, 1987), and motor control (e.g., Rosenbaum, 1990).This article examines the nature of order schemata in that behavior in which the serial-ordering problems are perhaps most acute, in language. We begin by reviewing evidence from serialorder errors in speech, particularly errors in which sounds or words are either anticipated, spoken ahead of their time, or perseverated, produced later than they should be. This evidence suggests that the past and future often impinge on the present while we are speaking and that the extent to which the languageproduction system is focused on the past or the future depends on a number of factors.We then present an experimental study of one of these factors, Gary S. Dell and Lisa K. Burger, Beckman Institute, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; William R. Svec, Department of Psychology, Indiana University Bloomington.This research was supported by National Science Foundation Grant SBR 93-19368 and National Institutes of Health Grants DC-00191 and HD 21011 and grew out of a project involving Gary S. Dell, Myrna Schwartz, Eleanor Saffran, and Nadine Martin.We are grateful for the advice of David Adams, Howard Berenbaum, Gary Bradshaw, Kay Bock, Cooper Cutting, Vic Ferreira, Zenzi Griffin, Susan Garnsey, Anita Govindjee, Prahlad Gupta, John Huitema, Gordon Logan, Gregory Murphy, Neal Pearlmutter, Brian Ross, Christine Sevald, and Ulrich Schade and for the contributions of Linda May, Julie Owles, and the Beckman Institute.Correspondence concerning this article ...

show abstract

The construction of reality in the child.

Cited by 4,185 publications

References 0 publications

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Generalizing the dynamic field theory of spatial cognition across real and developmental time scales

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Language production and serial order: A functional analysis and a model.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About