DEP6057 Advanced Developmental Psychology: Cognitive Development Fall 2013 Instructor: M. Jeffrey Farrar Office: PSY 086 Office Hrs: Wednesday 4 PM period or by appointment Phone: 352‐273‐2140 email: farrar@ufl.edu Purpose: To review the major theories and research related to cognitive development from infancy through adolescence. The objectives of the course are: (1) to review the different theoretical approaches and concepts for studying cognitive development, (2) to review the relevant empirical studies in support of these theories, and (3) to critically evaluate the relationship between data and theory. Requirements: 1. Topical Critical Reaction Papers: The class is divided into multiple sections. Select any 3 of these sections and write a 2‐3 page critical evaluation of the main issues covered in that section. Each paper will be due 1 week following the completion of that section (20%). 2. Research Proposal: A research grant proposal is required that proposes a study to investigate a specific topic in child (i.e., any period of infancy‐adolescence) cognitive development. The proposal should include an extensive literature review, hypotheses, method section, planned analyses, anticipated results, and implications. If possible, choose a topic that is beneficial and relevant to your own research. The paper length should be 15‐25 pages. It will be presented in class as a 10‐12 minute power point presentation on Dec. 3. (30%). 3. Exams: A mid‐term and final exam covering the main concepts is required. Format will be essays. (25%) 4. Participation. Class format will be primarily discussion and lecture. Generally each Wednesday class is divided into 2 sections. Students should read all of the assigned articles for a given class and be prepared to discuss them. Each student will co‐lead a discussion of two of the classes during the semester with either another student or with the instructor. The co‐leaders will provide an overview of each of the articles and organize and lead the discussion. The leaders should give a brief overview of the topic including summary of each of the required readings, e.g., what are the major theoretical issues, methodological concerns, points of controversy, unresolved issues, a discussion of empirical studies in the area, key findings, challenges for future research, etc. Discussion leaders should prepare and hand out an outline for class. In addition, three discussion questions 1
should be submitted at least 24 hours before the class. Grades will be based on clarity, depth, and discussion. In addition, all students should submit questions/comments to the group (via SAKAI) before each class regarding issues brought up during reading. (25%) Grading: A =91‐100 B+ =87‐89 C+ =77‐79 D+ =67‐69 F=0‐59 A‐ =90 B= 81‐86 C =71‐76 D = 61‐66 B‐ = 80 C‐ =70 D‐ =60 Readings: 1. Articles are available E‐Learning (SAKAI). 2. Children’s Thinking, Robert Seigler (latest edition) (background reading) Class Schedule August 27 Introduction to Cognitive Development Class Overview of Piagetian and Core Knowledge theories Siegler, R. Piaget’s Cognitive‐Developmental Theory, Chapter 2. Piagetian Theory Lourenco, O. & Machado, A. (1996). In Defense of Piaget's Theory: A reply to 10 common criticisms. Psychological Review, 103, 143‐164. Spelke, E., & Kinzler, E. (2007). Core Knowledge. Developmental Science, 10, 89‐96. Smith, L. (1999). Do infants possess innate knowledge structures? The con side. Developmental Science, 2, 133‐144. Sept. 3 Infant Cognition‐Part 1 Siegler, R. Perceptual Development, Chapter 5 Object & Physical Knowledge Piaget, J. (1954). Construction of Reality in the Child. (selected pages) New York. (photocopy) Baillargeon, R. & DeVos, J. (1991). Object permanence in young infants: Further Evidence. Child Development, 62, 1227‐1246. 2
Bertenthal, B., Gregeback, G., & Boyer, T. (2013). Differential contributions of development and learning to infants’ knowledge of object continuity and discontinuity. Child Development, 85, 413‐412. Kaufman, J. Csibram G. & Johnson, Mark (2003). Representing occuded objects in the human infant brain. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, 270, (supplement) S140‐143. Hood, B. et al. (2004). Predicting the outcomes of physical events: Two‐year‐olds fail to reveal knowledge of solidity and support. Child Development, 71, 1540‐1544. Sept. 10. Infant Cognition‐Part 2 *Number Concepts Wynn, K. (1992). Addition and subtraction by human infants. Nature, 358, 749‐750. Cohen, L. & Marks, K. (2002). How infants process addition and subtraction events. Developmental Science, 5, 186‐201. Hyde, D. C., & Spelke, E. S. (2011). Neural signatures of number processing in human infants: Evidence for two core systems underlying numerical cognition. Developmental Science, 14(2), 360‐371. Carey, S. (2002). Evidence for numerical abilities in young infants: a fatal flaw? Developmental Science, 5, 202‐209. Imitative Learning Nielsen, M. (2009). 12‐month olds produce others’ intended but unfilled acts. Infancy, 14, 377‐
389. Meltzoff, A. N., Waismeyer, A., & Gopnik, A. (2012). Learning about causes from people: Observational causal learning in 24‐month‐old infants. Developmental Psychology, 48(5), 1215‐1228. doi:10.1037/a0027440 Buttlemann, D., et al. (2013). Selective imitation in‐group over out‐group members in 14‐
month‐old infants. Child Development, 84, 422‐428. Sept. 17 Symbolic Development & Conceptual Development Siegler, R, Conceptual Development, Chapter 8. 3
*Early Childhood Concepts & Symbols Deloache, J. (2000). Dual representation and children’s use of scale models. Child Development, 71, 329‐338. Quinn, P. C., Doran, M. M. et al, (2010). Neural markers of subordinate level categorization in 6‐
7 month old infants. Developmental Science, 13, 499‐507. *Biological Concepts Gelman, S. A. (2004). Psychological essentialism. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 404‐409. Taylor, M. G., Rhodes, M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Boys Will Be Boys; Cows Will Be Cows: Children’s Essentialist Reasoning About Gender Categories and Animal Species. Child Development, 80(2), 461‐481. Tarlowski, A. (2006). If it’s an animal it has axons: Experience and culture in preschool children’s reasoning about animates. Cognitive Development, 21, 249‐265. Sept. 24 Information‐Processing & Problem‐Solving: Part 1 *Traditional Approaches Siegler, R. (2007). Cognitive variabilility; Developmental Science, Vol 10(1), 104‐109. Siegler, R. S. & Svetina, M. (2006). What leads children to adopt new strategies? A microgenetic/cross‐sectional study of class inclusion. Child Development, 77, 997‐1015. Connectionism Elman, J. & Bates, E. (1998). Rethinking Innateness. (Selected Chapters) Cambridge: MIT Press. Marcus, G. (1996). Why do children say “breaked”. Current Directions in Psychological Sciences, 5, 81‐85. Oct. 1 Reasoning and Problem‐Solving Garber, P. Alibali, M., Goldin‐Meadow, S. (1998). Knowledge conveyed in gestures is not tied to the hands. Child Development, 69, 75‐84. Müller, U., Dick, A., Gela, K., Overton, W. F., & Zelazo, P. (2006). The Role of Negative Priming in Preschoolers' Flexible Rule Use on the Dimensional Change Card Sort Task. Child 4
Development, 77(2), 395‐412. Prencipe, A., et al. (2008). Development of hot and cool executive function during the transition to adolescence. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 108, 621‐637. Reading TBA *Scientific Reasoning in Childhood and Adolescence Gopnik, A. (2001). Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: Two‐, three‐, and four‐
year‐olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Developmental Psychology, 37, 620‐629. Amsel, E., Klacyynski, P. (2008). A dual process account of the development of scientific reasoning: The nature and development of metacognitive intercession skills. Cognitive Development, 23, 452‐471. Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific thinking in young children: Theoretical advances, empirical research, and policy implications. Science, 337(6102), 1623‐1627. October 8 Mid‐term Exam Oct. 15 Memory Development *Childhood Memory Siegler, R. memory Development, Chapter 7 Nevo, E. & Breznitz, Z. (2013). The development of working memory from kindergarten to first grade in children with different decoding skills. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 11, 217‐228. Clerc, J., & Miller, P.H. (2013). Utilization deficiencies and transfer of strategies in preschoolers. Cognitive Development, 28, 76‐93. *Eyewitness Testimony Eisen, M.; Goodman, G. S.; Qin, J. Davis, S.; Crayton, J. (2007). Maltreated children's memory: Accuracy, suggestibility, and psychopathology. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1275‐
1294. 5
Roberts, K. & Powell, M. (2006). The consistency of false suggestions moderates children’s reports of a single instance of a repeated event: Predicting increases and decreases in suggestibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 68‐89. Oct. 22 Sociocultural Approaches *Co‐construction of knowledge Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.79‐91.(photocopy) Jack, F., MacDonald, S., Reese, E., & Hayne, H. (2009). Maternal reminiscing style during early childhood predicts the age of adolescents’ earliest memories. Child Development, 80(2), 496‐505. Lyons, D. E.., Yong, A., & Keil, F. (2007). The hidden structure of overimitation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 104 (50), 19751‐19756. *Comparative‐Developmental Approaches Moll, H. & Tomasello, M. (2007). Co‐operation and human cognition: The Vygotskian intelligence hypothesis. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 362, 639‐648. Reading TBA Oct. 29 Social Cognition‐Theory of Mind *Preschool Theory of Mind Wimmer, H. & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representations and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13, 103‐128. Schick, B., de Villiers, P., de Villiers, J., & Hoffmeister, R. (2007). Language and theory of mind: A study of deaf children. Child Development, 78, 376‐396. Tager‐Flusberg, H. (2007). Evaluating the theory of mind hypothesis of autism. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16,6, 311‐315. *Infant Theory of Mind Meltzoff, A. (2007). Like me: A foundation for social cognition. Developmental Science, Vol 10(1), 126‐134. 6
Onishi, K. H., & Baillargeon, R. (2005). Do 15‐month‐old infants understand false beliefs? Science, 308(5719), 255‐258. Nov. 5 Language Development: Speech Perception and Semantic Development *Speech Perception Kuhl, P. (2004). Early language acquisition: Cracking the speech code. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5, 831‐843. Vouloumanos, A. & Werker, J. (2004). Tuned to the signal: the privileged status of speech for young infants. Developmental Science, 7, 270‐276. Saffran, J., Aslin, R., & Newport, E. (1996). Statistical learning by 8‐month‐old infants. Science, 274, 1926‐1928. *Semantic Development Clark, E., (2004). How language acquisition builds on cognitive development. Trends in Cognitive Science, 10, 472‐479. Grassmanne, S., et al., (2009). Two‐year‐olds exclude novel objects as potential referents of novel words based on pragmatics. Cognition, 112, 488‐493. Markman, E., Wasow, J., & Hansen, M. (2003). Use of the mutual exclusivity hypothesis by young word learners. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 241‐275. Nov. 12 Language Development: Grammatical Development *Nativist Approaches Craine, S. (2006). Language acquisition is language change. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35:1, 31‐49. Lidz, J., Waxman, S., Freedman, J. (2003). What infants know about syntax, but couldn’t have learned: Experimental evidence for syntactic structure at 18 months. Cognition, 89, B65‐
B73. Senghas, A. & Coppola, M. (2001). Children creating language: How Nicaraquan Sign Language acquired a spatial grammar, Psychological Science, 12, 323‐328. 7
*Cognitive Approaches Chan, A., et al., (2010). Young children’s comprehension of English SVO word order revisited: Testing the same children in act‐out and intermodal preferential looking tasks. Cognitive Development, 25, 30‐45. Tomasello, M. (2005). Beyond Formalities: The case of language acquisition. Linguistic Review, 18, 183‐197. Chouinard, M. & Clark, E. (2003). Adult reformulations of child errors as negative evidence. Journal of Child Language, 30, 637‐669. Nov. 19 Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience *Normative Brain Development Diamond, A., & Amso, D. (2008). Contributions of neuroscience to our understanding of cognitive development. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(2), 136‐141. Crone, E. (2009). Executive functions in adolescence: inferences from brain and behavior. Developmental Science, 12, 825‐830. Oberecker, R., Freidrich, M, & Friederici, A. (2005). Neural correlates of syntactic processing in two‐year‐olds. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17:10, 1667‐1678. *Atypical Brain Development Dawson, G., et al. (2002). Neural correlates of face and object recognition in young children with autism spectrum disorder, developmental delay and typical development. Child Development, 73, 700‐717. Bellugi, U. (2000). The neurocognitive profile of Williams Syndrome: A complex pattern of strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 7‐29. *Nov. 26 Academic Achievement and Academic Skills Reynolds, A., & Temple, J. (1998). Extended early childhood intervention and school achievement: Age thirteen findings from the Chicago Longitudinal Study. Child Development, 69. 231‐246. Bornstein, et al. (2013). Systems and cascades in cognitive development and academic achievement. Child Development, 84, 154‐162. 8
Piasta, S., Justice, L., McGinty, A. et al. (2012). Increasing young children’s contact with print during shared reading: Longitudinal effects on literacy achievement. Child Development, 83, 810‐820. Dec. 3 Research Proposal Presentations TBD Final Exam 9