GCSE Psychology – Paper 1

YEAR 10

Cognition and
behaviour

Student revision guide

 MEMORY

What you will need to know for the exam:

• Processes of encoding, storage and retrieval
• A study of encoding
• Different types of memory
• The multi-store, including description and evaluation of studies to investigate these
explanations of memory
• Primacy and recency effects in recall
• Memory as an active process, Bartlett war of the ghosts and the theory of reconstructive
memory
• Factors affecting the accuracy of memory including interference, context and false
memories

Encoding (input): changing information so that it can be stored.

Storage: holding information in the memory system.

Retrieval (output): recovering information from storage.

Encoding

Visual encoding: Memories stored visually

Acoustic encoding Memories stored in terms of what they sound like

Semantic encoding Semantic refers to meaning – this is your ability to understand words and
concepts
Other encoding: tactile encoding for what things feel like and olfactory for smells
 Baddeley – a study into encoding

Aim: To see if there was a difference in the encoding of short term and long term memory.
Method: There were 5 groups of participants. Each was given a list of different words to
learn. The words were read out loud to the participant every 5 seconds. After each set of 5
words they were asked to immediately recall them in the correct order. Groups A and B did
this. Groups C and D recalled their words after 20 minutes.
Results: Baddeley found participants did worse with list A than B (words below). He also
found they did worse with list C than list D.
Conclusion: STM is encoded acoustically as list A had acoustically similar words. Participants
got the words muddled up do they must have been thinking in terms of the sounds of the
words. List C had semantically similar words (they all have a similar meaning) suggesting that
information is encoded semantically if not recalled right away (LTM)

List A: - cat, can, cab, cad, cap etc

List B - pit few cow pen etc
List C - great large big huge broad etc
List D - good huge hot safe thin deep etc

Evaluation of Baddeley
Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering lists of words.

A controlled experiment so the results are valid. The study was in a lab so other
variables have less of a chance of effecting the results

May not have been measuring LTM – he asked them to recall after 20 minutes. Is this
LTM? People may not have been able to recall the words the next day so he may not
have been testing what he wanted to.
 Multi-store Explanation

Sensory Short-term Long-term

store memory memory

EXAM TIP:
When asked to identify a feature (for example, a feature of the multi-store model), this
means that you must name it. Then, to describe it, you must say something about that
feature.

Short-term Long-term
Sensory store
memory memory

Duration: Less Duration: less

than a second than 30 seconds
Capacity: high unless rehearsed Duration: Up to
capacity – all of a lifetime
Capacity:
the 5 senses Approximately 7 Capacity:
pass information chunks of Unlimited
to it information 5+/-
Coding: Semantic
Coding: depends 2
on sense eyes is Coding: acoustic
visual, ears is
acoustic etc.
Evaluation of Multi-store model
Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering lists of words.

Not everything needs to be rehearsed; many everyday events can be easily remembered
and many things that are rehearsed are forgotten if you don’t understand them.

The model is too simple. Research has shown STM is divided into separate visual and
acoustic stores making our memory far more complex than this model suggests.

Baddeley supports the idea that STM and LTM are separate as they are both encoded
differently.

Primary and recency effects on recall

Murdock (1962)
Aim: To see if memory of word was affected by the amount of words you have to remember
Method: Murdock randomly selected 4000 words from the most common words in English. 103
students on a psychology course took part in the study. They took part in a number of
different sessions. In each session they listened to 20 word lists, each containing different
words. The words varied in length from 10 to 40 words. After each list the pp had to recall the
words they had just heard.
Results: The words at the end of the list were recalled first (known as the recency effect).
Words from the beginning of the list were also recalled quite well (known as the primacy
effect), but the middle words were not recalled very well at all.
Conclusion: Murdock concluded that this provides evidence for separate short-term and long-
term store as the words they heard first had been rehearsed so had passed top the LTM
store and the most recent words were still in their STM. The position of a word effects how
likely it is to be recalled (serial position effect)

Evaluation of Murdock
Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering lists of words.

A controlled experiment so the results are valid. The study was in a lab so other
variables have less of a chance of affecting the results. IV and DV are controlled

Research has shown people with amnesia can’t store long term memories and also do not
show a primacy effect but they do show a recency effect confirming that primacy
effect is linked to LTM.
 Processes: Different types of memory
Long term memory

Episodic memory - Memories from events. What you have done and what experiences
you have had. E.g. a gig you went to last week, your birthday party etc. these
memories are time stamped.

Semantic memories – It is the meaning of everything you know, knowledge that is shared
with others. E.g. Paris is the capital of France, England winning the world cup in 1966.
These are not time-stamped.

Procedural memories – muscle memory. Remembering how to do things e.g. ride a bike.
We can recall these without conscious awareness or a great deal of effort.

Evaluation of LTM
Clive Wearing – a case study where he could still play the piano (procedural memory) but
had almost all of his past showing different types of memory.

HM case study also supports this. He had his hippocampus removed and he could recall
how to do things but not recall events from the past.

Research has shown that the different types are in different parts of the brain.
Episodic and semantic in the prefrontal cortex (episodic in the left and semantic in the
right) procedural has been found in the motor cortex.
 Reconstructive Memory

We may reconstruct what we think we saw or processed to help us retrieve it from long-term
memory.

Bartlett (1932)
Aim: To see if people, when given something unfamiliar to remember, would alter the
information. To use a story from a different culture to see how cultural expectations
affect memory
Method: Participants were asked to read a story called ‘The War of the Ghosts’, which
was a Native American legend. After 15 minutes they were asked to retell the story as
accurately as possible. Then he showed a new version to another participant and asked
them to recall it a short time later. This retelling was repeated several times during the
weeks that followed.
A key feature of the study was it belonged to a culture that was very different to the
pps . His participants were from his university in the UK.
Results: Bartlett discovered that his participants found it difficult to remember bits of
the story concerned with spirits and changed other bits of the story so that it made
more sense to them. Each time they retold the story they changed it some more.
The story was shortened, phrases were changed to fit the pps own culture e.g. “boats”
instead of “canoes”
Conclusion: Bartlett concluded that our memory is influenced by our own beliefs and
these beliefs and fragments make the material easier to remember.

EXAM TIP:
When you are asked to describe a study, you must always
state the aim of the study, the method used, the results
obtained and the conclusion drawn. You must include all
four elements in your answer to receive all of the marks.

Evaluation
It would be very difficult to measure the accuracy of the stories told with a
reliable scoring method. – the participants were not given specific details about
what they needed to do.

This study is more relevant to the way we use memories in everyday life, so it has
ecological validity, however, the story was unusual does not reflect everyday
processes.

Bartlett interpreted his own data so may have affected the way his behaviour
should be interpreted.
 The theory of reconstructive memory

Memory is inaccurate – Bartlett changed the notion that we can recall any event without
altering it in any way. He proposed memory was an active process. We store fragments of
information and when we need to recall something we build these fragments into a meaningful
whole.

Reconstruction – We change our information before we store it in our LTM. We “record”

small pieces if information and then later, when recalling the event, we recombine the pieces
to tell the story.

Social and cultural influences – People transform parts of a story or picture based on their
cultural expectations. This changes how they recall information. Bartlett called this “the
social psychology of remembering”

Effort after meaning – People recalled the general meaning of the events rather than the
specific meanings in the War of the ghosts story. Bartlett used the phrase “effort after
meaning” to describe this. He meant 1. We focus on the meaning of events and 2. Afterwards
we try to interpret the meaning of the events into more familiar fragments.

Evaluation
Bartlett tested memory using specific materials which could test memory in
everyday life unlike trigrams and most other memory research. Bartlett is more relevant
to real-life memory processes.

Not all memories are inaccurate or affected by social expectations.

This information can be used to explain problems in Eye witness testimony. Bartlett
helped to highlight that memories may not be accurate after all.
 Accuracy of memory - Interference

Interference: Things that we have learnt that make it difficult to recall other information
that we have learnt

Proactive interference: When information we have already learnt hinders our ability to
recall new information

Retroactive interference: When information we have recently learnt hinders our ability to
recall information learnt previously

Proactive interference

Material learned Interferes Material learned

with
first after
Retroactive interference

Is interfered with
Material learned first by Material learned after

McGeoch and McDonald’s study

Aim: To see what affect a second activity has on the accuracy of memory
Method: Participants were asked to learn a list of 10 words until them could remember
them with 100% accuracy. They were the shown a new list. 12 participants were used.
There were 5 different lists shown to participants
List 1 – synonyms – words with the same meanings as the originals
List 2 – antonyms – words with the opposite meanings to the originals
List 3 – words unrelated
List 4 – nonsense syllables
List 5 – three-digit numbers
Results: When the participants were asked to recall the original list of words, their
performance depended on the nature of the second list. The more similar the material,
the less accurate the recall
Conclusion – interference is strongest when an intervening activity is similar.
Evaluation of McGeoch and McDonald
Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering lists of words.

A controlled experiment so the results are valid. The study was in a lab so other
variables have less of a chance of affecting the results. IV and DV are controlled

Not really forgetting – It is possible that interference effects are just temporary and
that the information is not actually forgotten.
 Accuracy of memory - Context

Godden and Baddeley (1975)

Aim: To see if people who learn and are tested in the same environment will recall more
information than those who learn and are tested in different environments.
Method: 18 Participants who were deep-sea divers were recruited. They were divided
into four groups. They were given 36 unrelated words either on a beach or under 10
feet of water. All of the groups were given the same list of words to learn:
 Group 1 had to learn underwater and recall underwater
 Group 2: had to learn underwater and recall on the shore
 Group 3 had to learn on the shore and recall on the shore
 Group 4 had to learn on the shore and recall underwater
Results: Groups 1 and 3 recalled 40% more words than groups 2 and 4.
Conclusion: Recall of information will be better if it happens in the same context that
learning takes place.

Group 1

Learn Recall
Group 2

Learn Recall
Group 3

Learn Recall
Group 4
Evaluation of Godden and Baddeley
Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering lists of words.

The recall was short-term. If we want to study the effect the context really has
they should have asked them to recall the information later on.

The context of being underwater is not realistic – in reality the information

people need to know for an exam is usually learnt in multiple contexts and is not
affected by one specific context.
 Accuracy of memory: False memories

Loftus & Pickrell

Aim: To see if false memories could be created in pps through suggestion in
order to test the existence of repressed and false memories
Method: There were 24 participants in the study. A relative was also contacted for
each pp. The pps were given 4 short stories about childhood events that had been
obtained from their relatives. Three of the stories were true and one was false. The
false story was about getting lost in a shopping mall in their childhood and being rescued
by an elderly woman. The false information was crafted from the information given by
the relative e.g. the relative said what the child’s favourite story was etc. Each child
was asked to read each story and write down what they remembered about each event.
A week or 2 later they were interviewed about the stories. They were interviewed a
second time and then debriefed.
Results: IN total there were 72 true episodes to be remembered and pps
remembered 68% of these. 6 of the pps (25%) recalled the false story fully or
partially. 19/24 participants correctly guessed the lost in the mall memory as
false.
Conclusion: The research suggests that the mere act of imagining the event has the
potential to create and implant a false memory in a person. This affects the accuracy of
memory.

Evaluation

Lacks ecological validity because memory in real life does not usually consist of
remembering stories – the story about a mall is not a traumatic event so may affect the
results

Ethical; issue – pps may be left with implanted memories. Even though they did a debrief
at the end people may be left or have lingering sense that it happened. This is
manipulation.

Had real life application for eye witness testimony. Such research into leading questions
and false e memories has changed the way courts deal with EWT – it is no longer
regarded as being a reliable.
 Perception
What you need to know for the exam:
Content Additional information
Sensation and The difference between sensation and
perception perception.
Visual cues and Monocular depth cues: height in plane,
constancies relative size, occlusion and linear perspective.

Binocular depth cues: retinal disparity,

convergence.
Gibson's direct The real world presents sufficient
theory of information for direct perception without
perception – the inference.
influence of nature
Role of motion parallax in everyday
perception.
Visual illusions Explanations for visual illusions: ambiguity,
misinterpreted depth cues, fiction, size
constancy.
Examples of visual illusions: the Ponzo, the
Müller-Lyer, Rubin’s vase, the Ames Room,
the Kanizsa triangle and the Necker cube.
Gregory's Perception uses inferences from visual cues
constructivist and past experience to construct a model of
theory of reality.
perception – the
influence of
nurture
Factors affecting Perceptual set and the effects of the
perception following factors affecting perception:
culture, motivation, emotion, expectation.

The Gilchrist and Nesberg study of

motivation and the Bruner and Minturn study
of perceptual set
 Sensation - The information we receive through our senses

Perception:
How we interpret or make sense of the information we receive.

The difference between them:

The Difference between feeling and thinking. Sensation is our body’s way of detecting a
stimulus in the environment and perception is how our brain organises and interprets this
information.

EXAM TIP:

When distinguishing between two terms,

remember that examples could be helpful and
could earn extra marks.
Remember to use ‘whereas’ to distinguish
between the two definitions.

Theories of perception:
Need to know Gibson’s direct theory of perception and Gregory’s constructivist theory
Visual Illusions

The Ponzo illusion

This is an example of a misinterpreted
depth cue. The horizontal line higher up the
image appears longer than the horizontal
line towards the bottom.

The Muller-Lyer illusion

This is an example of a misinterpreted
depth cue. The vertical line with
outgoing arrows or fins is perceived as
longer than the other. They are the
same size.

The Rubins vase illusion

This is an example of an ambiguous
figure. It can be seen as a vase or 2
faces. After staring at this for a few
seconds you should be able to perceive
either.
 The Ames room illusion
This is an example of a misinterpreted
depth cue. The trick for this is the
shape of the room. The people appear
to be stood next to each other
whereas actually is much further back
and people perceive them as being
much smaller than the other.

How do we perceive?

Monocular depth cue – a way of detecting depth or distance, which will work with
just one eye

Binocular depth cue - a way of detecting depth or distance, which requires two
eyes in order to work.
• There are different ways of detecting depth or distance: Monocular
depth cues
 Height in plane - Objects higher up in the visual field appear further
away

 Relative size - Smaller objects in the visual field appear further away

 Occlusion - Objects that obscure (hide) or are in front of others
appear to be closer

 Linear perspective - When parallel lines converge (come together) at
some point on the horizon
 This point is known as the vanishing point

Binocular depth cues –

Convergence – a form of depth perception which uses how eye muscles focus on
images
Retinal disparity – a form of depth perception which compares the images from two
eyes, side to side.
 Gibson’s direct theory of perception

A01

Gibson stated that perception is innate and hat we are born with the ability to perceive
rather than it being a skill we learn through experience. He said everything in our optic
array gives us all the information we need to be able to judge depth, distance and
movement. For example, our eyes detect optic flow patterns which let our brains know we
are moving. Gibson thought binocular and monocular cues were needed so that we are able to
judge depth and distance accurately. One cue is motion parallax where objects that are
closer to us in our visual field are moving further away.

Motion parallax – the way the visual field changes with movement, with close
objects seeming to move more than objects further away.

Evaluation
A strength of Gibson’s theory is that it has real world meaning as his research was based on
experience from pilots from the second world war. This makes the theory more relevant to
explain how we perceive on a daily basis.

On the other hand, a weakness of his theory is that it struggles to explain visual illusions as
Gibson said that we always perceive accurately but illusions show this is not always the case.
This shows there are some aspects of perception that his theory cannot explain.

Support for the idea we are born with the perceptual ability comes from Gibson and Walk
who found that very few young children would crawl off a visual cliff. This suggests that
their depth perception ability is innate as they were too young to learn it.
 Gregory’s constructivist theory of depth perception

A01

• The constructivist theory of perception argues that our past knowledge and
experience is important in making sense of what is around us. Perception works by
making reasonable guesses about what we see, on the basis of what it is likely to be.
• Gregory studied with Bartlett and this theory about perception was influenced by him
• He believed that perception works by making reasonable guesses about what we see,
on the basis of what it is most likely to be – this is called making inference

A Perceptual hypothesis - These conclusions tend to be the most probable

explanations for the visual information we are receiving

A mistaken hypothesis - Sometimes the brain draws the wrong conclusion from the
available evidence

Evaluation
Nurture plays a key role - the Muller-Lyer illusion to non-Western pps who had not
grown up in the same built environment, they did not perceive one line as longer than the
other.

This theory can explain 2D images, however, struggles to explain perception in the real
world.

Gibson and Walk who found that very few young children would crawl off a visual cliff. This
suggests that their depth perception ability is innate and contradicts this theory

Culture research supports that nurture plays a part in perception and perceptual set.
 What factors affect our perception?

You need to know about culture, motivation, emotion and expectation (including key studies)

A Perceptual set - is the tendency of our brain to notice, or prefer, certain aspects of
the sensory environment. This means other aspects are noticed less or ignored
altogether.

Culture

Hudson

Aim: To see if culture can affect depth cues

Method: Showed 2D drawings to people from different cultures. Native black, South
Americans were either schooled or unschooled and white Europeans who were either
schooled or unschooled. They were asked 1. What do you see? 2. What is the man doing? 3.
Which is the nearer, the man, elephant or antelope?
Results: Many people replied elephant. Both black and white schooled pps were more likely to
perceive depth perception than unschooled pps. This was linked to height in plane and
relative size.
Conclusion: In school pps probably had more exposure to 2D images and were more likely to
have learnt how to interpret these images. Children in South Africa at the time were
probably more likely to have had access to books and magazines as well which would make it
easier for them to interpret these images.

Evaluation
Interpretations ma y have been a problem as some of the pps may not have
understood what was being asked of them.

The material is a 2D image which could have been a problem. People in

different cultures may have found it more useful to use something which they
are used to having in their environment.

This study is out of date – it was done over 50 years ago so the findings may
be different today.
 Emotion

McGininnies

Aim: To see does it take longer to recognise words and say them when embarrassed
Method: 8 male and 8 female pps were used. Some were shown neutral words on a screen .
Others were mildly offensive e.g. bitch. Each word was presented one at a time and they had to
say it out loud as soon as they recognised it. The GSR was measured.
Results: People took longer to recognise the offensive words than the neutral ones. The taboo
words produced a bugger response on the GSR.
Conclusion: Emotion is a factor in perceptual set. The higher level of anxiety (measured on the
GSR) is associated with the taboo words and slows down the recognition of words. Our brains
when confronted with the words that are offensive or cause embarrassment block them out, if
even for a moment.

Evaluation
A scientific measure was used to measure the GSR (Galvanic skin response) making this
method reliable and not biased.

The delay with the taboo words could have been explained through awkward rather than
embarrassed. This is a confounding variable.

Other studies contradict these results.

 Motivation

Gilchrist and Nesberg

Aim: To see what affect food deprivation would have on the perception of food-related
pictures.
Method: 26 undergraduates took part in this experiment. They were deprived of food for
20 hours before the study. There was also a control group which were not deprived of food
before the study. The pps were shown 4 slides of a meal (spaghetti, steak, hamburgers or
fried chicken). Each slide was shown for 15 seconds and they were told that this was an
exercise to match the pictures. After each slide the projector was turned off and, and
then turned on this time dimmer. The pp was asked to adjust the lighting knob so that the
picture looked the same as it did before.
Results – the way that the food deprived pps adjusted the lighting suggesting that they
had perceived the food pictures as brighter than they actually were. The control group did
not do this.
Conclusion: Hunger is a motivating g factor that affects perception.

Evaluation

Some other research supports this study

Unethical – food deprivation could be criticised on ethical grounds. They may have
experienced discomfort, however, they did give consent to take part in this study.

This study is not very true to life – lacks ecological validity. Judging pictures is not
something you would normally do in an everyday situation.
 Expectation

Bruner and Minturn

Aim: To see whether an ambiguous figure was affected by the context it is shown in
Method – The ambiguous figure they used could either be perceived as being a B or
13. They used an independent groups design. PPs were either shown a sequence of
letters ie from top to bottom in the diagrams below, or from left to right. In each
case the stimulus in the middle was the same and pps had to report and also draw
what they had seen.
Results – The group that saw letters were more likely to report a B, whereas, the group
that saw numbers were more likely to report a 13.
Conclusion: Expectation has an important influence on perceptual set.

Evaluation

This study is not very true to life – lacks ecological validity. Judging pictures is not
something you would normally do in an everyday situation.

Independent groups design – participant variables between the groups could have affected
the score

It explains all the errors people can make supporting Gregory’s constructivist theory or
perception - as he stated people come up with a hypothesis to test as perception is an
active process
 Development topic

Development
 a specified state of growth or advancement

Child development
 Child development means that at certain
ages children hit ‘milestones’ - they are
developing physically, cognitively.

Basic outline of brain development

 Frontal lobe - associated with cognitive activities e.g. thinking, planning and problem solving
 Parietal lobe – processes information related to touch on the skin like heat, cold, and pain
 Temporal lobe - hearing
 Occipital lobe - vision
 Four key parts of the brain

Brain stem – carries motor and sensory nerves to different parts of the body. It controls many
basic life functions such as breathing, heart rate, sleeping and eating.

Cerebellum – Means little brain – Coordination of movement. Located near the top of the spinal
cord.

Thalamus – Located deep in the brain. The thalamus passes information from the sense organs to
the cortex.

Cortex – the outer layer of the brain where higher cognitive functions take place e.g. speech

The role of nature and nurture

Psychologists believe that on the nature side some of your characteristics are
inherited from your parents and so is your behaviour.

Those on the nurture side believe that characteristics are influenced by our environment
and develop after birth depending on the experiences you have.

Smoking, drinking alcohol and infection are all examples of nurture which can affect
someone’s development, even when in the womb.

Nature
 The idea that our characteristics are inherited

Nurture
 The idea that our characteristics are influenced by our environment
 Early brain development

Begins during the third week of pregnancy

The multiplying cells form a structure called the neural plate. This folds over to form
the neural tube.

During the fourth week the neural tube begins to divide into the spinal cord,
forebrain, midbrain and hindbrain.

During the sixth week the forebrain divides into 2 areas and then goes on to form the
cortex. Some of this develops into the thalamus. Neurons and synapses begin to
develop into the spinal cord, which allows the foetus to move in the womb.

By the fifteenth week, the cerebellum has formed in the hindbrain. By the sixth
month the brain is fully formed (although not at full size)

During the last 3 months of pregnancy, folds being to form on the cortex. This gives
the brain a wrinkled appearance.

At birth the brain is 25% of its adult size.

 Piaget’s theory

Piaget studies children’s cognitive development. He believed that schemas were key
to a child’s cognitive development and he described how schemas developed as a child
grew up.

Before Piaget’s theory people thought that young children were the same as adults but
they just knew less. They believed that once children developed that knowledge they
would be the same as adults.
• Piaget showed that children don’t simply know less – they actually think in quite a
different way. We have a number of different schemata in our brain that we are
constantly adding to throughout our life and when we develop – these develop
through assimilation and accommodation.

Schema - blocks of knowledge that develop in response to our experiences of the

world.

Assimilation – adding new information to an existing schema

Accommodation – changing a schema, or developing a new schema to cope with a

new situation
 Evaluation

Piaget’s theory has led to a lot research being done to test his ideas -
e.g. the naughty teddy bear study or the hiding policeman.
Piaget’s ideas have led to real world applications. His ideas are used in
Education to help with teaching in the classroom.
He only used middle-class children (he also used his own children). They
were also all from where he lived in Switzerland. Therefore we may not
be able to generalise his findings to the rest of the population and
different cultures.

Piaget’s stages of development

• Object permanence - Knowing that objects still exist even though they are
out of sight

• Egocentrism- not being able to see things from another person’s point of view

• Conservation – knowing that the amount of something stays the same, even
though its appearance may change
 Sensorimotor stage – 0-2 years
In this stage children learn about the world through their senses and through moving
about. The main feature of this stage is OBJECT PERMANENCE (Knowing that
objects still exist even though they are out of sight)

Pre-operational stage – 2-7 years

Main feature is that children become EGOCENTRIC in this stage. The three
mountain model was used to test this with the children. He found that children
under the age of 7 chose a photo that showed their own view, and children 7 or over
chose a photo which showed the dolls view. He concluded children are no longer
egocentric from aged 7.

Concrete operational stage – 7-11 years

He believed that by the time children were seven they could conserve and were in
this stage. To investigate conservation of number, Piaget showed children 2 identical
rows of counters. He then asked the child if there were the same amount of
counters in each row. When the child agreed there were he then spread out the
counters while the child watched. He then asked the child again if there were the
same amount of counters in each row. Children under 7 said there were not, children
over 7 said there were.

Formal operational stage – 11+ years

The main feature of this stage is that children are able to solve problems in a
systematic and mathematical way. Children were given lengths of string and a
number of weights which could be attached to the string. The child had to
investigate how fast the pendulum would swing. The child had to vary the length of
string, and the number of weights attached. Piaget found that children under 11
would attempt to change both the weight and the length of the string at the same
time. However, children after 11 would solve the problem systematically. E.g. they
would keep the length of the string the same, whilst they changed the weights from
lightest to heaviest.
 Evaluation
McCarrigle and Donaldson’s naughty teddy study contradicts the ages
of conservation
Hughes Policeman doll study also contradicts the ages egocentrism
occurs suggesting that Piaget’s theory is not reliable.
He did a lot of his research on small samples of children, and some of
the experiments were conducted on his own children. These samples
are unrepresentative and cannot be generalised.
His research has had a major impact on early year’s education and his
work has led to many other researchers investigating children’s
cognitive development.

The role of Piaget’s theory in education

Piaget believed that a child’s intelligence develops from discovering things for
themselves. He said that children needed to explore objects and different
situations to learn about them. He also added that children would need to be at
the right stage of development in order to learn new concepts.

In nurseries and early years at primary schools many of Piaget’s suggestions are
used. There is a heavy focus on discovery learning with the use of sand pits and
water trays etc. to help children discover what items can sink or float. Also,
giving children science problems to solve either on their own or in groups, allows
them to learn from experiences.

APPLYING PIAGET TO EDUCATION

 Teachers should take a readiness approach and present opportunities for

their students to learn new concepts in the right stage of development
 Children should be taught in a “child-centred” way. The children should be
allowed to problem solve and discover answers for themselves.
 Materials for Science and Maths should have objects that children can
manipulate and change e.g., string and weights to investigate the pendulum
task.
McCarrigle and Donaldson’s “naughty teddy” study (1974)

THIS IS A KEY STUDY WHICH YOU NEED TO KNOW

Aim: To see if the children developed conservation skills at an earlier age than
Piaget found, if the change to the materials was accidental.

Method: A laboratory study in which there was some control of extraneous

variables. All procedures were standardised to ensure the study could be
repeated. 80 children between the ages of 4 and 6 took part in the study. The
children were shown two rows of counters and asked if there was the same
amount in each row. Then a glove puppet called “naughty teddy” made an
appearance. “Naughty teddy” accidently messed up one of the rows of counters in
front of the child. The messed-up row was spread out to look longer than the
other row. The experimenter pretended to really cross with naughty teddy and
told it off. The child was then asked if there were the same amount of counters
in each row.

Results: 62% of the four to six year olds stated that there was still the same
amount of counters in each row, therefore they could conserve. Only 16% of four
to six year olds answered the question correctly in Piaget’s conservation of
number study, when the adult made the change to the counters.

Conclusion: Children younger than the age of 7 can conserve if the change to the
counters/materials appears to be accidental. When naughty teddy messes up the
row of counters and spreads them out, younger children know the amount of
counters has not been changed.
Evaluation

Other studies have supported these results. This offers more support
to this study compared to Piaget’s original findings.
The children were tested by an adult stranger in an unusual
environment. Perhaps if the adult had been familiar to them and they
were in their usual environment, more children between the ages of
four to six would have been able to conserve.
Over 30% of children still failed to conserve when naughty teddy made
the change suggesting that their results are not as valid as first
thought.

Hughes “Policeman doll” study (1978) – ANOTHER KEY STUDY

Aim – To see if children can see things from another person’s point of view

Study design: A laboratory study in which there was some control of

extraneous variables. All procedures were standardised to ensure the study
could be repeated.30 children between the ages of three and a half and 5
years old took part in the study.

Method: The children were shown a model with two intersecting walls that
formed a cross. A policeman doll was placed on the model. The child was asked
to hide a boy doll so the policeman doll could not see him.

The policeman was then placed in different positions on the model, and the
child was asked to hide the boy each time. This was to ensure the child
understood the task. If the child made mistakes, they were told and allowed
to try again. This was rarely necessary as the children seemed to understand
the task straight away.

Then the actual experiment began. Another policeman doll was placed on the
model and the child was asked to hide the boy doll so that neither policeman
doll could see him. This was repeated three times so that a different section
of the grid was left as the only hiding place each time.

Results: 90% of the children aged between three-and-a-half and five years
were able to hide the boy doll from the two policeman dolls.

Conclusion: children aged between three-and-a-half and five years can see
things from someone else’s point of view, if the situation is familiar to them,
and the task makes sense. This was different to Piaget’s finding that children
are egocentric until they are seven.
Evaluation

This study made much better sense to the children than Piaget’s
original study did as the policeman task was a task that the children
would be more likely to experience in everyday life, rather than the
three mountains task.
One strength is that this key study challenges Piaget’s original
findings.
The researcher may have unconsciously hinted about the correct
answer which would make this study lack validity.
 Dweck’s mindset theory of learning

• This theory explains how children can achieve success in their learning
• Dweck specifically talked about maths and science but it can be applied to all
subjects.
• When a student is faced with a challenge, the type of mindset they have will
affect how they are going to deal with it.
• Fixed mindset - will give up very quickly
• Growth mindset – will keep on trying which will increase their chances of
succeeding.
• Changing mindsets - These can be changed through training

• In one study, students were taught about what happens in their brain each time
they learn something new and difficult. These students showed a major
improvement in their exam results, compared to a control group who did not
receive the lesson.
• Examples of changing mindsets - I’m just not good at math (fixed) -With help and
persistence, I can improve my understanding of math. (growth)

• I can’t do this (fixed) - I am still learning how to do this. (growth)

• Fixed mindset - Students believe that their intelligence in unchanging. They

believe it is genetic and there is nothing they can do to change it.

Growth mindset - students believe their intelligence comes from hard work. They
believe it can be increased by putting more time and effort into learning.
 The role praise on learning

Dweck believes that the type of praise or positive feedback a student receives from
their teacher affects their mindset. She suggests there are 2 types of praise:

Person praise – the student is p0raised for their intelligence e.g. they are told that
they are clever or that they are a great mathematician.
Process praise – the student is praised for their effort and the processes they use to
complete a task. E.g. praised for the strategies they use or the progress they have
made.

Students who receive person praise believe that their successes and failures are
something beyond their control. Students who receive process praise believe their
successes and failures are due to the amount of effort they put in.

Study – students were given an online maths game to play that gave them feedback on
their effort, strategy and progress. This was different to the usual maths games that
provided scores as feedback. It was found that with this new game, students made
more effort, used more strategies and persevered for longer. It was concluded that
the type of praise a student receives has a high impact on their learning.

Evaluation

This study helps us to understand how students can increase their

exam grades
It informs teachers that students mind-sets can be changed and
explains how they can change them
Studies like the one above support Dweck’s theory
 The role of self-efficacy in learning

 Self-efficacy is the belief in your own ability to succeed at a task. A student with a
strong self-efficacy puts in effort to achieve goals. They will challenge themselves
with difficult tasks, and are likely to be successful. A student with low self-efficacy
believes they will not be successful and will not try. Students increase self-efficacy
by:
 Being successful at something
 Observing other people succeed at something due to their effort
 Begin guided through a task
 Being persuaded they can achieve by a role model such as a teacher.

Learning styles (VAK)

 First of 3 different learning styles –

 Visual – learn best by reading or seeing pictures. They like to see what they are
learning. They remember things by what they look like
 Auditory - Learn best by listening. They like to hear something, speak it or learn it.
 They remember what they have heard
 Kinaesthetic - Learn best by doing something. They like to move or make what they are
learning. They remember best when some type of physical activity is involved.

• Another theory: Calls learners verbalisers and visualisers.

• Verbalisers – process information verbally. They prefer to learn from written

information, and they like to write things down. They think using words.
• Visualisers – process information visually. They prefer to learn from pictures and
diagrams. They think using patterns.
 Willingham’s learning theory and his criticism of learning styles

Willingham disagrees with the idea of learning styles and that a person should be taught in a
way that matches their preferred learning style e.g. VAK. In his theory he points out that
there is no experimental evidence to support their existence. Studies have actually showed
that learning in their preferred learning styles has no effect on exam results.

Willingham argues that many students may have better visual or auditory memory, but it
does not help them in the classroom. This is because teachers usually want students to
remember what things mean not what they look or sound like. The student should extract
the meaning of information, not store what it looks or sounds like. This may explain why
teaching in a person’s preferred learning style does not affect their exam performance.

Willingham believes that students should be taught with the best method for the content
being taught. E.g. when learning about the brain all of the student should be given a diagram
of the brain and not just the visual learners.

In Spanish – all of the learners would need to hear the words being pronounced and not just
the auditory learners. Willingham believed that all learners should be given the opportunity
to practice dealing with different types of information.

Evaluation
Willingham uses scientific research which are all related to learning so
this means that we can trust his conclusions
It has been specifically applied to applications to learning. This means
his research has real-world value. (Learning styles do not affect exam
performance.)
 Check your understanding

1. Identify one part of the brain which has been shown to affect the development of
movement. (1 mark)

2. Briefly explain the function of the thamalus (3 marks)

3. Explain how accommodation might occur when a child recognises that a small
fluttering creature is not a bird, but is told it is a butterfly. ( 3 marks)

4. Describe and evaluate Piaget’s theory of development. (9 marks)

5. Use your knowledge of conservation to explain how the thinking of a seven year old
may differ from a five year old (3 marks).

6. Briefly outline what the participants were asked to do in the “Hughes policeman
doll study” (2 marks)

7. Explain one evaluation of Hughes “policeman doll study” (3 marks)

8. Using an example of behaviour, distinguish between a fixed and growth mindset (4

marks)

9. Evaluate Willingham’s learning theory (5 marks)

 Research method checklist

Content Additional information

Variables Independent variable, dependent variable,
confounding or extraneous variables
Hypothesis Directional or non-directional
Quantitative and Know each type of data and specify the
qualitative data difference between the two types.
Strengths and weaknesses of each type.
Primary and Know each type of data and specify the
secondary data difference between the two types.
Strengths and weaknesses of each type.
Laboratory and Strengths and weaknesses of each type
field experiments
Sampling Opportunity sampling
Random sampling
Systematic sampling
Stratified sampling
Experimental Independent groups
design Repeated measures
Matched pairs
Ethical issues Informed consent
Deception
Protection from harm
Privacy
Confidentiality
AND ways to deal with them
Interviews and Structured, semi-structured and
questionnaires unstructured interviews.
Open and closed questions
Descriptive Mean, median, mode and range. Strengths
statistics and weaknesses of using each type.