Literature DB >> 20853994

Situated naïve physics: task constraints decide what children know about density.

Heidi Kloos1, Anna Fisher, Guy C Van Orden.   

Abstract

Children's understanding of density is riddled with misconceptions-or so it seems. Yet even preschoolers at times appear to understand density. This article seeks to reconcile these conflicting outcomes by investigating the nature of constraints available in different experimental protocols. Protocols that report misconceptions about density used stimulus arrangements that make differences in mass and volume more salient than differences in density. In contrast, protocols that report successful performance used stimulus arrangements that might have increased the salience of density. To test this hypothesis, the present experiments manipulate the salience of object density. Children between 2 and 9 years of age and adults responded whether an object would sink or float when placed in water. Results indicated that children's performance on exactly the same objects differed as a function of the saliency of the dimension of density, relative to the dimensions of mass and volume. These results support the idea that constraints--rather than stable knowledge--drive performance, with implications for teaching children about nonobvious concepts such as density.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20853994      PMCID: PMC3580042          DOI: 10.1037/a0020977

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen        ISSN: 0022-1015


  23 in total

Review 1.  Cognitive development: foundational theories of core domains.

Authors:  H M Wellman; S A Gelman
Journal:  Annu Rev Psychol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 24.137

Review 2.  Coordination.

Authors:  M T Turvey
Journal:  Am Psychol       Date:  1990-08

3.  Misconceptions about motion: development and training effects.

Authors:  I Levin; R S Siegler; S Druyan
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  1990-10

4.  Simplicity and generalization: Short-cutting abstraction in children's object categorizations.

Authors:  Ji Y Son; Linda B Smith; Robert L Goldstone
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2008-06-18

5.  Structural packaging in the input to language learning: contributions of prosodic and morphological marking of phrases to the acquisition of language.

Authors:  J L Morgan; R P Meier; E L Newport
Journal:  Cogn Psychol       Date:  1987-10       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Cognition: the view from ecological realism.

Authors:  M T Turvey; C Carello
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1981 Aug-Dec

7.  On differentiation: a case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density.

Authors:  C Smith; S Carey; M Wiser
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1985-12

8.  Gorillas in our midst: sustained inattentional blindness for dynamic events.

Authors:  D J Simons; C F Chabris
Journal:  Perception       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 1.490

9.  Are children's rule-assessment classifications invariant across instances of problem types?

Authors:  R P Ferretti; E C Butterfield
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  1986-12

10.  Judgments of natural and anomalous trajectories in the presence and absence of motion.

Authors:  M K Kaiser; D R Proffitt; K Anderson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 3.051

View more
  1 in total

1.  Hands-on experience can lead to systematic mistakes: A study on adults' understanding of sinking objects.

Authors:  Ramón D Castillo; Talia Waltzer; Heidi Kloos
Journal:  Cogn Res Princ Implic       Date:  2017-06-20
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.