Piaget and Inhelder (1956) ‘Three mountains task’ Friday, April 05, 2019 Piaget and Inhelder (1956) ‘Three mountains task’

STRETCH - even more and I will be able to: Learning objectives EXPECTED PROGRESS- I  will learn how to: STRETCH - even more and I will be able to: Must Describe Piaget’s study on cognitive development Evaluate one strength and one weakness of Piaget’s study, using some key terminology. Should Evaluate two strengths and one weakness of Paiget’s study, using key terms accurately. Could Evaluate two strengths and two weaknesses of Paiget’s study, using key terms accurately. Critically evaluate whether Paiget’s study offers a valid explanation for the link with stages of development and cognitive thinking, using key terms precisely.  

Background to the study According to Piaget’s cognitive development theory, a young child in the pre-operational stage sees their own viewpoint and cannot see someone else’s view of the world. Piaget called this inability egocentrism. The understanding that there are viewpoints other than their own is something that develops over time. This helps to take children into the concrete operational stage., whether they cannot ‘decentre’-they can see from a viewpoint other than their own and can consider multiple views of a situation. The ‘three mountains task’ is part of a series of experiments that Jean Piaget and Barbel Inhelder wanted to look at a child’s understanding of groups of objects. They set up a study using a model of a group of mountains where children on different sides would have different views of each mountain.

Key words Qualitative data-data that is in depth and descriptive (not numbers). Gathers more in depth information. Reliability-If an experiment was repeated, it would have the same outcome or result.

AIM To look at the extent to which children of different ages were able to take the view of another person Children's overall system of putting together a number of different views of what they see.

Task In your groups your aim is to recreate the study. I want you to consider the Aims, procedure, results and conclusion.

Procedure 100 children were studied. Children under 4 years old were not involved in the study as they were considered too young for the task. Four main pieces of equipment Involved building a model of three mountains using sheets of paper pasted together to form a card. The model was one meter square and ranged from 12 to 30 cm high. The lowest mountain was green and had a house on top, the next highest was brown and had a red cross on top and the highest, which was grey, had a snow –covered top.

Four main pieces of equipment continued… The smaller green mountain had a path winding down it while the middle-sized brown mountain had a stream coming down it. Ten pictures of the model were taken from different positions around it. The pictures were taken so that the features were visible and the colours were clear. There were three pieces of card the same colour as the mountains, which the child could arrange to represent the mountains according to a certain viewpoint. There was a wooden doll, around 3cm high, with no facial features.

Ways of questioning the child The child was asked to use the cardboard shapes to show how the mountain scene looked from different viewpoints. They were asked to place shapes to show the view they themselves were looking at. They also placed the shapes to show what the doll could see. The child was shown 10 pictures of the model and asked to pick out the picture that represented what they could see from different positions. They were also asked to choose the picture that the doll could see from different positions. The child chose a picture and then had to position the doll so it could see that viewpoint.

RESULTS Pre-operational stage Concrete operational stage Children 4-6.5 years chose pictures and placed cardboard to show their own view of the three mountains model, even if asked to show the doll’s view. Children cannot place the doll in a position where the view matches a picture the child is shown. Even though the children in this stage start to see that there are views other than their own, overall they show egocentrism. Concrete operational stage From 7-9 years the child starts to understand that others looking from a different position can see the model differently position can see the model differently. By 9-10 years, children can understand that the doll has a different view if in a position that is different from their own. As part of the experiment, Piaget and Inhelder gathered qualitative data and included observations about individual children in their report.

Conclusion Children up to 7 years old were egocentric. Towards the end of the pre-operational stage, the children were more able to think about someone else’s viewpoint. Children in the pre-operational stage did not have the understanding of ‘viewpoint’ yet. Other children were non-egocentric. They were able to look at the mountains as objects relating to one another, such as the larger one sometime blocking the view of the smaller one. Older children were able to position their own viewpoint among views of others and construct mental representations of what others can see. They could co-ordinate different perspectives.

Conclusion Provided evidence for developmental stages. Showed children in the pre-operational stage were egocentric. Showed children in concrete operational stage could take a different view from their own.

Evaluation Strengths They provided a great deal of detail about what was done and the results. Qualitative data-rich in detail and in depth. They looked in detail at the errors and what each child did. This meant they could show that as a child neared the next stage of development, they could achieve elements of that next stage. They used experimental methods. Careful controls were in place, such a s the same model and question. This allowed comparisons to be made between the results from different children. Reliability-Repeating the study with many children, moving the doll and using different ways of getting the child to show what they saw or what they thought the doll saw. 13

Weaknesses Helen Borke (1975) Changed Piaget and Inhelder’s task to make it more appropriate for younger children. Used the puppet Grover from Sesame Street and let children turn the model of mountains by using a turntable. She found 3 year olds could give the puppet viewpoint correctly more than 79% of the time. 4 year old’s did this 93% of the time. She suggested the ‘three mountains task’ was too hard, not because they are egocentric. 14

Weaknesses Willingham Used Repacholi and Gopnik’s (1977) study to criticise Piaget’s stages of development. In a study of the ‘three mountains task’ they found that children of 18 months could show non-egocentric behavior. In their study, children tasted crackers, which they liked, and broccoli, which they did not like. Then they saw the experimenter show dislike of the cracker taste and liking of the broccoli. Later, the experimenter placed a bowl of crackers and one of broccoli on the table and asked the child to pass one of the bowls. The 14 month old passed the food themselves, indication egocentrism. Children aged 18 months, passed the broccoli because that is what they thought the experimenter liked; they could appreciate the experimenters view. 15

Review and reflect Each group to write down 3 questions relating to Piaget and Inhelder’s study. You then have to pass your questions to another group to see if they can answer them.