Misleading Conservation A Study of Piagetian Tasks Robert Gentry

Jean Piaget (1896-1980) Born in Neuchâtel, Switzerland Published his first paper at age 11 Received a Ph.D. in natural science from the University of Neuchâtel. Married Valentine Châtenay in 1923 Fathered three children, Jacqueline, Lucienne, and Laurent

Jean Piaget (cont.) Taught at the Grange-Aux-Belles street school for boys run by Alfred Binet Became director of studies at the Rousseau Institute in 1921 Directed the International Bureau of Education from 1929 to 1968. Created the International Center for Genetic Epistemology in 1955 Published over 50 books and 500 papers Received honorary doctorates from over 30 Universities including Harvard and Cambridge

Conservation The bridge between preoperational thought and concrete operations Develops in stages over a period of several years “The first operatory conservations do not make their appearance until around age seven or eight (substance) and others are added at intervals until the age of twelve (volume).” (Piaget, 1966, p. 47)

Misleading Questions Misleading questions have been shown to affect children’s responses to questions of conservation of weight. “Results show that children who are beyond the age at which they presumably have mastered concrete operations and, indeed, adults as well, will often give the response suggested by the question, which is literally and logically incorrect.” (Winer & McGlone, 1993, p. 1)

Problem Major Premise: Minor Premise: How does the way in which a question is asked affect a child’s ability to conserve? Minor Premise: Can misleading questions make a child less likely to conserve?

Hypotheses Children who are asked misleading questions will be less likely to conserve, and this effect will be more pronounced in more difficult tasks such as conservation of mass and volume. In accordance with Winer and McGlone’s (1993) findings, girls will be less likely to conserve than boys regardless of the type of question.

Participants Eight students from Mrs. Gentry’s First Grade Class from Kimberlin Academy in Garland, TX Three boys, five girls Six and seven years old Tasks were performed one-on-one with the children in the main hallway of the school Participants were opportunistically assigned to either the experimental or control group

Experimental Group All children were asked to complete three tasks relating to conservation of number, mass, and volume. After performing the task: lining up a pile of pennies/ flattening a ball of Play-dough/ pouring water into a larger cup, children were asked a misleading question. “Which pile of pennies/ lump of Play-dough/ cup of water has more?”

Control Group These children were given the same tasks as those in the experimental group. After performing the task: lining up a pile of pennies/ flattening a ball of Play-dough/ pouring water into a larger cup, children were asked a control question. “Are these piles of pennies/ lumps of Play-dough/ cups of water the same?”

Non-conserving Responses Number: “Because it’s a line and it looks like more.” – Jordan, age 6 Mass: “Because it was smashed. This one [the ball] has like 100 and the other [the pancake] has like 102.” – Andrea, age 7 Volume: “If we pour this one in it, it gets more because it’s skinnier and makes it bigger.” – Mercedes, age 6

Conserving Responses Number: Mass: Volume: “I haven’t taken any away.” – Jorge, age 7 Mass: “It’s just the shape that changed.” – Rachel, age 6 Volume: “If you pour it in a bigger cup it’s still the same amount.” – Chris, age 7

Experimental vs. Control

Boys vs. Girls

Conclusions The data supports both hypotheses. The children who were asked misleading questions were less likely to conserve than the control group. Girls tended to be less likely to conserve than boys. However. . .

Threats to Validity Sample size Environment Question Format Only eight participants; only three boys Environment Time constraints; distractions Question Format Control questions may also lead participants’ responses