Presentation on theme: "Piaget, Werner, and the Mountain Experiment Presented By Katie Apodaca, Daniel DePauw, and Nina Di Pietro."— Presentation transcript:
Piaget, Werner, and the Mountain Experiment Presented By Katie Apodaca, Daniel DePauw, and Nina Di Pietro
Summary Overview TheoristsTheorists Original ExperimentOriginal Experiment Our ExperimentOur Experiment HypothesesHypotheses Experiment ProceduresExperiment Procedures VocabularyVocabulary Experiment InteractionExperiment Interaction Results and AnalysisResults and Analysis ConclusionConclusion CritiqueCritique QuestionsQuestions Nature Vs. NurtureNature Vs. Nurture
Heinz Werner: A Short Biography Born: 1890 in Vienna, Austria; Died: 1964 Thought about becoming an engineer, but entered the University of Vienna hoping to become a composer & music historian Accidentally entered a philosophy class, which sparked his interest from then on Participated in the Gestalt movement in Hamburg 1933 Dismissed from Hamburg because he was Jewish 1936-1943 studied mentally impaired children Taught at Brooklyn College, then Clark University
Werner Vocabulary Orthogenic Principle: The developmental process of a child goes from a relative lack of differentiation to an increased state of differentiation. Synesthesia: The syncretic unity of the senses. Physiognomic Perception: The way one perceives stimuli when reacting to its emotional and expressive qualities. Self-Object Differentiation: Process by which children learn to differentiate themselves from the world around them. –Sensori-motor, Perceptual, Conceptual
Jean Piaget: A Short Biography Born in Switzerland in1896 Published first article at age 10 Earned P.H.D. in Natural Sciences Studied his own children Focused on children’s mistakes Tested children’s ego-centric perception using the “3 Mountain Problem” Experiment
Piaget Vocabulary Egocentrism: When a child regards everything from his or her own viewpoint; a child who is egocentric cannot distinguish between the viewpoints of others from his own.
“Three Mountain Problem” Piaget designed this experiment to support his theory that children possess egocentric characteristics of thought during the preoperational period of cognitive development (Ages 1-7). After showing a child all sides of the mountain, he tested if the child could describe a side from the doll’s perspective.
“Three Mountain Problem” (Cont.) Preoperational children failed to describe the mountain from the doll’s perspective The child typically described their own side of the mountain demonstrating egocentric perception
Our Experiment We are investigating children’s perception and how it relates to synesthesia. Our experiment combines Piaget’s “Three Mountain Problem”, which focuses on perception, with Werner’s theory of synesthesia and the orthogenic principle. Lastly, we are analyzing the physiognomic perception of the children.
Hypothesis 1—Orthogenic Principle 1.The older children are, the better they will remember what they see on the mountain because they will have had more time to develop their ability to perceive.
Hypothesis 2—Synesthesia 2. The more exposure to the senses, the more experience the child will have to draw upon, thus perceiving things beyond himself. We believe that the children who have more exposure to different sensory domains will give more differentiated responses.
Hypothesis 3—Physiognomic Perception 3. With more exposure to sensory domains, the children will give more physiognomic responses.
Our Experiment Salvation Army After School Program Located 5 minutes away from campus Ages 6-12 years old Most kids were already familiar with Katie
The Experiment Group arrives Explanation Starting on Collin Cow’s side, the group travels around the mountain. After the “tour”, the group sits down and, seeing only the icy side of the mountain, proceed to answer the questions.
Experiment (Cont.) Group 1—SIGHT Group 2—SIGHT and SMELL Group 3—SIGHT, SMELL, and SOUND
The Mountain 1.Collin Cow’s Waterfall Side 2.Greta Groundhog’s Volcano Side 3.Betty Bear’s Forest Side 4.Your Snowy Side
The Mountain (Cont.) Collin Cow’s Waterfall Side 1.Orange Fish 2.Yellow Fish 3.Rock 4.Opossum 5.Squirrel
The Mountain (Cont.) Greta Groundhog’s Volcano Side 1.Vulture 2.Bones 3.Raptor 4.Lizard 5.Spider
The Mountain (Cont.) Betty Bear’s Forest Side 1.Flowers 2.Bunny Family 3.Deer 4.Snake 5.Owl
The Mountain (Cont.) Your Snowy Side 1.Trees 2.Penguins 3.Walrus 4.Arctic Fox 5.Lake
Time to be a Guinea Pig
Results and Data Analysis Using our questionnaire, we compiled the answers received, along with biographical information, on various charts. We gave each child a point for each correct object remembered.
Orthogenic Principle Whenever development occurs, it proceeds from a state of relative lack of differentiation to a state of increasing differentiation and hierarchic integration. Application: Our experiment tested whether or not the Orthogenic Principle is applicable with perception (i.e. the older the child, the better his or her ability to perceive and remember the different sides of the mountain).
Orthogenic Principle NameAgeBirthdayGroup Waterfall Volcano ForestTotal Angalena 6 Dec. 23 13205 Ruben 6 Apr. 16, 2003 244412 Elisa 6 Mar. 28 32103 Mark 7 Jan. 24 12226 Tuan 7 Apr. 14 24408 Alex 8 Apr. 13 12114 Julia 8 Sept. 20 32327 Jadia 9 Jul. 14, 2000 33227 Carlos 9 Oct. 24 30* Jose 10 Nov. 22, 1998 244311 Miguel 11 Aug. 5, 1998 156415 Antonio 11 Oct. 6, 1998 21326
Analysis With a few exceptions, the orthogenic principle applies to the development of perception. Ruben (6) with 12 total Highest score: Miguel (11) with 15 total. Lowest score: Elisa (6) with 3 total.
Orthogenic Principle—Waterfall NameAgeGroupWaterfall SideTotal Angalena61Trees, Lake, Grass3 Ruben62Leaves, Waterfall, Fishes, Rock4 Elisa63Orange Fish, Waterfall2 Mark71Tree, Bush2 Tuan72Owl, Fox, Fish, Rocks4 Alex812 Fish swimming2 Julia83A Waterfall and Bushes2 Jadia93Waterfall and Grass and Animals3 Carlos93Collin Cow smells so good0* Jose102 She sees a Waterfall, Possum, Orange and Yellow Fish, and a Deer 4 Miguel111 2 Fish trying to swim up so they won't hit the rock. Opposum, Squirrel, & bird that flew over to get water. 5 Antonio112Owl1
Orthogenic Principle—Volcano NameAgeGroupVolcanoTotal Angalena61Lava, Lizard2 Ruben62Lava, Spider, Bones, Branches4 Elisa63Waterfall, Water1 Mark71Lizard, Vulture2 Tuan72Lava, Dinosaur, Rocks, Bones4 Alex81Dried Lava1 Julia83Lava and Lizards and A Burnt Mountain3 Jadia93Lava and Burnt Wood2 Carlos93Stuff to eat0* Jose102He sees Lava, Spiders, Raptor, Vulture4 Miguel111 Lava, Rocks, Spider, Vulture, Lizard, & Dinosaur I think 6 Antonio112Lava, Raptor, Spider3
Orthogenic Principle—Forest NameAgeGroupForest SideTotal Angalena610 Ruben62 Little Deer, Leaves, Berries, Little Pods4 Elisa63Fox, Waterfall, Bear0 Mark71Deer, Snake2 Tuan720 Alex81Family of Bunnies1 Julia83She sees Flowers and Bushes2 Jadia93Flower and Animals2 Carlos93She loves the snow0* Jose102 She sees an Owl, Squirrel, Bunny family3 Miguel111Bunnies, Snake, Owl, and Trees4 Antonio112Deer, Snake2
Synesthesia The syncretic unity of the senses. A condition in which normally separate senses are not separate. Sight may mingle with sound, taste with touch, etc. The senses are cross-wired. Ex. Hearing colors Application: With each new group in our “Three Mountain Problem” experiment adaptation, we added an additional sense to see if it had an effect on the children’s perception.
Analysis Our results do not immediately show that increasing synesthesia improved perception. Group 2 did do better than Group 1, but Group 3 had the lowest results.
Synesthesia—Waterfall NameAgeGroupWaterfall SideTotal Mark71Tree, Bush2 Alex812 Fish swimming2 Angalena61Trees, Lake, Grass3 Miguel111 2 Fish trying to swim up so they won't hit the rock. Opposum, Squirrel, & bird that flew over to get water. 5 Antonio112Owl1 Ruben62Leaves, Waterfall, Fishes, Rock4 Tuan72Owl, Fox, Fish, Rocks4 Jose102 She sees a Waterfall, Possum, Orange & Yellow Fish, & a Deer 4 Carlos93Collin Cow smells so good0* Elisa63Orange Fish, Waterfall2 Julia83A Waterfall and Bushes2 Jadia93Waterfall and Grass and Animals3
Synesthesia—Volcano NameAgeGroupVolcanoTotal Alex81Dried Lava1 Angalena61Lava, Lizard2 Mark71Lizard, Vulture2 Miguel111 Lava, Rocks, Spider, Vulture, Lizard, & Dinosaur I think 6 Antonio112Lava, Raptor, Spider3 Ruben62Lava, Spider, Bones, Branches4 Tuan72Lava, Dinosaur, Rocks, Bones4 Jose102He sees Lava, Spiders, Raptor, Vulture4 Carlos93Stuff to eat0* Elisa63Waterfall, Water1 Jadia93Lava and Burnt Wood2 Julia83Lava and Lizards and A Burnt Mountain3
Synesthesia—Forest NameAgeGroupForest SideTotal Angalena610 Alex81Family of Bunnies1 Mark71Deer, Snake2 Miguel111Bunnies, Snake, Owl, and Trees4 Tuan720 Antonio112Deer, Snake2 Jose102 She sees an Owl, Squirrel, Bunny family 3 Ruben62Little Deer, Leaves, Berries, Little Pods4 Carlos93She loves the snow0* Elisa63Fox, Waterfall, Bear0 Julia83She sees Flowers and Bushes2 Jadia93Flower and Animals2
Why Did Group 3 Perform the Way They Did? Carlos Source of Sound Looking at the Laptop More Females in Group 3 Do males perform better?
Physiognomic Perception Perceiving stimuli through their dynamic, emotional, and expressive qualities as opposed to perceiving objective and measurable properties. Application: In our experiment, we asked the children questions (Questions 4 and 5) that we thought would provoke them to answer in a manner that would reflect physiognomic perception.
Physiognomic Perception NameAgeGroupQ 4Q 5 Angalena61Lake Ruben62Dam Elisa63BonesOcean Mark71Oaks Tuan72Rainbows Alex81BrightThere's a Fox Julia83BeautifulGorgeous Jadia93HawaiiBeautiful Carlos93Side smells goodIt is cold Jose102 Collin the Cow is really peaceful. Not a lot of noise. She lives near a waterfall and poison snake. Miguel111 Foresty with a lot of trees. Nature and Survivory Antonio112Rocky
Analysis Our results show that children do reflect physiognomic perception. However, the results are not substantial. Child did not answer both questions. There is no correlation between ages. Difficulty by the way we worded the question. Children asked what Questions 4 and 5 meant. Several were left blank.
A Closer Look at Carlos Egocentric Perception –Beyond egocentric perception. He describes things from the perspective of the different animals.
A Closer Look at Carlos (Cont.) Self-Object Differentiation –High perceptual level –Perceives things apart from the self but his perceptions still are entwined with his own actions and feelings. Question 1: Greta Groundhog sees “stuff to eat”. Question 2: “Collin Cow smells so good.” Question 3: Betty Bear “loves the snow”.
Conclusion Hypothesis 1—Orthogenic Principle: Correct! With the exception of Ruben, results showed that the older the child was, the more developed his perception was.
Conclusion Hypothesis 2—Synesthesia: Wrong! (according to our results) Having more children involved in the experiment could have brought about more consistency. Sound should have been better concealed.
Conclusion Hypothesis 3—Physiognomic Perception: Wrong! (according to our results) Phrasing our question differently could have better tested for physiognomic perception.
If we could do it again… Do the experiment with more kids! Spend more time on each side of the mountain Add another sensory experience, like touch Conceal the source of sound Have the kids face the mountain when answering the questions Maybe ask about just one side of the mountain to create more focus Less interruptions, have a more isolated experiment environment Do the experiment with one subject at a time to prevent distractions Do the experiment with UD students Create more diverse groups
Questions 1.Do males and females respond differently to different sensory experiences? 2.Why did Ruben, who was not only exposed to one sensory experience but also was 6 years old, respond better than most of the other subjects? 3.Why is Carlos at a higher perceptual level? 4.Do socioeconomic backgrounds affect the responses of the children? 5.Was our experiment too complex to get reliable results?