Discussion
The purpose of the present research was to investigate if restrictions influence perceived problem-solving abilities and if those who prefer less restriction would score significantly different on a problem solving inventory (PSI). The results of this study provided little support for the pre-experimental hypothesis. The current investigation utilized a standardized measure to increase validity. The aim of this study was the interrelatedness of perception and problem-solving ability. The PSI reliably measured perception of problem-solving ability. It may have had face validity, content validity, and criterion-related validity for this study, but it was not a valid indicator of other perceptional influences. Similar to
…show more content…
For example, in the first study children were asked to sort using one rule and then the other immediately after. One could infer that the children struggled with the constraints of the task and as opposed to performance.
Zelezo and Frye (1998) did not distinguish the task guidelines as an imposed restriction. They noted that young children lack the ability to psychologically-distance themselves from the concepts for a larger perspective of context. According to Luria (as cited by Zelezo & Frye), it had been a challenge to determine the reason for performance failure without a clear concept of the problem-solving framework in place. In the end, they decided to refocus their research efforts towards the influence perceptions of problem-solving ability had on executive function performance-tasks (Zelazo & Frye). The current research was a product of that reasoning; it questioned the influence perception of restriction had on both, respectively.
The survey exposed participants to an inventory of perception that was presumably less restrictive for responses juxtaposed to the PSI. The participants were asked to prefer the restricted response or open-response inventory. The open-response section was only used for grouping and responses were not used in the scoring process of this study. However, in retrospect, this too may not have been a valid measure to establish the preference of
Cognitive psychology involves a multitude of different processes, and one of these amazing processes is problem solving. There are several approaches to understanding problem solving, some of these being the Gestalt approach, the information processing approach, and analogical problem solving. Creativity and open mindedness can play a critical role in solving problems as they can provide out of the box thinking in finding abnormal or unusual solutions. Sometimes being an expert in a specific field can aid in problem solving as a source of knowledge, and sometimes it can hinder problem solving as a set of boundaries for thinking. Many obstacles in problem solving have to do with fixation on
*Publication manual of the American psychological association (6th ed.) (2009). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Please see note below regarding this edition of the APA manual.
Cognitive development is the term used to describe the construction of thought process, including remembering, problem solving and decision-making, from childhood through adolescence to adulthood. In this essay I will compare and contrast the theories of Piaget and Vygotsky, both of which were enormously significant contributors to the cognitive development component to/in psychology. In addition to this I will also weigh up the strengths and weaknesses of each theory and outline how they can be applied to an educational setting.
The sample for this study consisted of 222 participants who were second year psychology students from the University of Newcastle. All students were participating as part of a course requirement and all had given their consent to participating in the study.
Jean Piaget is known for his theories in cognitive development theory. His theory is based on the idea that children constantly construct knowledge as they explore and mold their environment. There are four stages in Piaget’s theory, sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operations, the stages also corresponds with how old the child is. Not every child will be in the stage that matches the child’s age because some children are exceptional. Piaget’s theory is based on the cognitive development of how the average child shows their learned behavior through performed tasks. As I went through the first interview, I realized that how the children came to develop their answers was what’s important about the assignment. each child with the Piagetian Task Kit, I started to realize The Piagetian Task Kit helped me examine and see where each child was at in their cognitive development level.
The materials used for this study included PsychMate Student Version 2.0 (St. James, Walter Schneider and Amy Eschman.) Psychology Software Tools, Inc. Along with the PsychMate software, a computer provided by Queens College was used in order to successfully complete the study.
5. I thought the researchers’ use of multiple scales was very helpful to provide more evidence. In psychology, we are testing for ideas or concepts that are not observable. It’s important to rely on more than one type of research to capture these changes in scores or perception. It also gave the study a higher chance of showing a significant difference.
American Psychological Association. (1996) . Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (4th ed.) . Washington, DC: American Psychological
In the Introduction of How Children Succeed, the author Paul Tough presents the notion that future success is dependent on a variety of factors, rather than a common singularity. He encounters this proposition during his time at a pre-kindergarten and kindergarten program called Tools of the Mind. According to Tough, the program asserts on the following, by which he writes, “rubric self-regulation, will do more to lead to positives outcomes for their students … than the traditional menu of pre-academic skills” (Tough xii). In comparison to other programs, Tools of the Mind emphasizes on the development of behavioral or self regulated skill-sets. Puzzled by his findings and deviation from his understanding that success is largely tied to the
As part of our training for the month of March, I watched Philip Zelazo’s talk on executive function (EF) and the developing brain. I learned that EF is different from “intelligence” (although it is related), and refers to using knowledge in service of goals. EF has three main components: cognitive flexibility, working memory, and inhibitory control. By looking at these components in early childhood, researchers can predict outcomes such as social understanding, school readiness, and SAT scores. Zelazo pointed out that EF is a better measure of school readiness than an IQ test because the education system enforces children to pay attention, follow rules, and sit still. Furthermore, EF in childhood can predict physical health, drug use, criminal
Participant probes, such as psychophysical tests, are used to quantify behaviour and mental processes. The human mind attempts to react, adapt, and respond to repeated stimuli, and personal differences of participants, such as socioeconomic status and history of mental health, may affect how they respond to the stimuli. Furthermore, repeated access to similar stimuli, as seen in some surveys in tests, may allow the participant to recognize and adapt to the stimulus. How do psychological tests avoid bias, confounding variables, and other influences on results? Results cannot be generalized if practice effects or participant variables significantly impact the data, but the tests must equally permit enough variance for the results to be generalized
Type of research. Bjork and Glenys’ used quantitative research to evaluate the information they collected. Data was analyzed with frequency distribution and inferential statics. For the second research question, nominal data was computed with t-tests and interval data was evaluated using Pearson’s r. Concepts within the cognitive continuum framework where measured using descriptive frequencies, t-test, chi-square test, and linear regression.
B) Challenge – Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development states that children benefit mostly from tasks that they can perform with the help of an individual who is more competent (Ormrod, 2016 p. 308). Piaget also agrees with the idea of children being challenged. He states that children grow when they experience disequilibrium, which is represented by being challenged (Ormrod, 2016, p. 308).
According to Piaget Cognitive Development Theory, Child X is in the preoperational stage (2-7 years) (Berk, 2013). Child X is found to be mentally active and interactive with very good mental perception. She has adequate understanding of the objects, environment and teachings. She is able to imagine and conceptualise and displays good level of concentration and even problem solving attitude. Her cognitive skills and memory power is remarkable. She is observed to be a focused and attentive child. Her strategy and ability to solve the puzzle proves her intellectuality and problem solving skill. She seems to possess good memory when she tries the puzzle the second time. She is actively learning as she observes and imitates her friends during play. This is a benefit to increase learning opportunities according to the Behaviourist
The second domain that describes children in middle childhood is cognitive development. Unlike physical characteristics, cognitive development emphasizes on mental development of children. Cognitive development consists of information processing and language (Santrock, 2008). In the aspect of information processing, developments of memory, thinking and metacognition are experienced by children in middle childhood (Santrock, 2008). According to Papalia et al. (2009), the efficiency of working memory of children during this stage improves substantially. This means that they are able to make calculation, organize information into groups, and repeat and reverse at 5 or more numbers that they heard. Besides, children in middle childhood are able to think critically, deeply, and think in different dimension of the task during middle and late childhood (Eccles, 1999). According to the concrete operational stage in Jean Piaget’s theory, operational thinking of children in middle childhood includes four aspects which are logic, decentration,