Baillargeon's Explanation of Infant Abilities (AQA A-Level Psychology): Revision Notes
Baillargeon's Explanation of Infant Abilities
Introduction to Baillargeon's approach
Renee Baillargeon developed her explanation of infant cognitive abilities in response to Jean Piaget's theory of the sensorimotor stage. While Piaget argued that infants under 8-9 months lacked understanding of the physical world, including object permanence, Baillargeon proposed that even very young babies possess a fairly well-developed understanding of how the physical world operates.
Baillargeon's work emerged from concerns about Piaget's research methods. When infants failed to search for hidden objects, Piaget interpreted this as evidence they didn't understand objects continue to exist when out of sight. However, Baillargeon suggested this failure might reflect limitations in motor skills or attention rather than lack of understanding.
Key concepts and terminology
Knowledge of the physical world refers to how well we understand the way physical objects and events operate. This includes grasping concepts like gravity, object permanence, and the rules governing how objects interact with each other.
Object permanence represents the understanding that objects continue to exist even when they disappear from view. This concept is central to debates about when infants develop sophisticated thinking about their environment.
Violation of expectation research (VOE) is Baillargeon's innovative method for studying infant cognition. The approach assumes that if babies understand physical laws, they will expect certain outcomes in specific situations. When these expectations are violated, infants should show surprise through increased attention or looking time.
The violation of expectation method
Baillargeon's VOE research typically follows a structured procedure. Infants first observe familiarisation events where they see normal, expected occurrences. For example, they might watch a short rabbit pass behind a screen, remaining hidden, and a tall rabbit pass behind the same screen but appear in a window above.
During test events, researchers present both possible and impossible scenarios. In possible events, objects behave according to physical laws. In impossible events, these laws appear to be violated.
If infants look longer at impossible events, this suggests they recognise something is wrong, indicating understanding of the relevant physical principle. This longer looking time is interpreted as surprise or violation of expectation.
Key study: Baillargeon and Graber (1987)
Worked Example: Testing Object Permanence in Infants
Participants: 24 infants aged 5-6 months
Aim: To investigate whether infants possess object permanence using the violation of expectation method
Procedure:
- Infants were shown familiarisation events featuring a tall rabbit and a short rabbit moving behind a screen with a window
- In the possible test condition, only the tall rabbit appeared in the window as it passed behind the screen
- In the impossible test condition, neither rabbit appeared in the window, violating expectations about the tall rabbit's visibility
Findings:
- Infants looked at the impossible event for an average of 33.07 seconds
- They looked at the possible event for only 25.11 seconds
- This significant difference in looking time suggested infants were surprised by the impossible condition
Conclusion: The results indicate that 5-6 month old infants possess object permanence, contradicting Piaget's timeline
Evaluation of the study:
Strengths:
- The VOE method eliminates confounding variables present in Piaget's research, such as motor skill limitations
- Provides better validity than traditional methods as loss of interest cannot explain longer looking at impossible events
- Demonstrates infant understanding earlier than Piaget's timeline suggested
Weaknesses:
- Difficult to determine what infants actually understand from their looking behaviour
- Behavioural responses may not reflect conscious understanding of physical principles
- Alternative explanations for increased looking time cannot be completely ruled out
Baillargeon's theory of infant physical reasoning
Baillargeon proposed that humans possess an innate physical reasoning system (PRS). This system provides us with basic understanding of physical properties from birth, which becomes increasingly sophisticated through experience and learning.
The PRS helps infants identify different event categories corresponding to various ways objects can interact. For example, occlusion events occur when one object blocks another from view. Through exposure to these categories, children develop increasingly nuanced understanding of physical laws.
Initially, infants have only crude awareness of physical principles like object persistence. However, their PRS predisposes them to notice relevant information in their environment, allowing rapid learning about physical relationships and properties.
Extension research: Bower et al. study
Earlier research by Bower and colleagues (1971) had suggested infants might understand object permanence earlier than Piaget claimed. In their study, 4-month-old infants watched a train move along a track before disappearing behind a screen. Rather than losing interest as Piaget would predict, infants continued looking towards where the train should emerge, suggesting they expected it to continue existing.
When a different object appeared from behind the screen instead of the expected train, some infants showed surprise. This provided additional evidence that young infants possess sophisticated understanding of object permanence.
Evaluation of Baillargeon's approach
Strengths
The VOE method represents a methodological improvement over Piaget's approaches. By focusing on looking time rather than active searching behaviour, it removes potential confounding factors like inadequate motor development or attention difficulties. This provides a purer measure of cognitive understanding.
The universal nature of physical understanding supports Baillargeon's argument for an innate PRS. Cross-cultural research shows consistent patterns in physical reasoning across different societies, suggesting biological rather than learned origins.
The PRS theory aligns with other research on infant cognitive abilities. Studies demonstrate that babies can make crude judgements about distance and depth from early ages, with experience refining these abilities over time.
Weaknesses
A major limitation concerns the interpretation of infant behaviour. While babies look longer at impossible events, this doesn't necessarily prove conscious understanding of physical laws. Alternative explanations, such as greater visual complexity or movement in impossible scenes, could account for increased attention.
The relationship between behavioural response and actual understanding remains unclear. As Bremner (2013) notes, responding to violation of expectations differs substantially from the conscious understanding adults use for physical reasoning.
Additionally, the VOE method involves considerable inference about infant mental states. Researchers cannot directly access what babies think or understand, making conclusions somewhat speculative.
Key Points to Remember:
-
Baillargeon challenged Piaget's view that infants lack object permanence before 8-9 months, proposing they have earlier understanding than previously thought
-
The violation of expectation (VOE) method measures infant looking time at possible versus impossible events, providing a more valid test than traditional approaches
-
The key Baillargeon and Graber study found 5-6 month infants looked significantly longer (33 seconds) at impossible events compared to possible ones (25 seconds)
-
Baillargeon's physical reasoning system (PRS) theory suggests humans are born with innate basic understanding of physical laws that develops through experience
-
While the approach offers methodological improvements over Piaget's work, questions remain about whether behavioural responses truly reflect conscious understanding of physical principles