3-year-old children do not tend to describe inanimate objects with lifelike qualities, even when the object is a robot that can move (Jipson, Gülgöz, & Gelman, 2016). Most 4-year-old children understand that animals grow, and even plants grow, but objects do not (Backschneider, Shatz, & Gelman, 1993). Sometimes, however, young children provide animistic responses. Gjersoe, Hall, and Hood (2015) suggest an emotional component to animistic beliefs. They found that 3-year-olds attribute mental states to toys to which they are emotionally attached but not to other favorite toys, even those with which they frequently engage in imaginary play. Finally, children show individual differences in their expressions of animism and reasoning about living things, and these differences are linked with aspects of cognitive development such as memory, working memory, and inhibition (Zaitchik, Iqbal, & Carey, 2014).
Research Findings on Reversibility and the Appearance–Reality Distinction
Although young children typically perform poorly on conservation tasks, 4-year-old children can be taught to conserve, suggesting that children’s difficulties with reversibility and conservation tasks can be overcome (Gallagher, 2008). In addition, making the task relevant improves children’s performance. For example, when children are asked to play a trick on someone (i.e., “let’s pretend that this sponge is a rock and tell Anne that it is a rock when it really is a sponge”) or choose an object that can be used to clean spilled water, many choose the sponge, illustrating that they can form a dual representation of the sponge as an object that looks like a rock (Sapp, Lee, & Muir, 2000). Three-year-old children can shift between describing the real and fake or imagined aspects of an object or situation. In addition, they can describe misleading appearances and functions of objects in response to natural conversational prompts, as compared with the more formal language in the typical prompts used in traditional appearance–reality tasks (e.g., “What is it really and truly?”) (Deák, 2006). In sum, preschoolers show an understanding of the appearance–reality distinction, and it develops throughout childhood (Woolley & Ghossainy, 2013).
Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory
Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky emphasized the influence of culture on children’s thinking. Specifically, he proposed that cognitive development is influenced by differences in the ways particular cultures and societies approach problems. Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective asserts that we are embedded in a context that shapes how we think and who we become. Much of children’s learning comes not from working alone but from collaborating with others.
Children learn culturally valued skills by interacting with and helping skilled partners.
John Scofield/ Contributor via Getty Images
Specifically, Vygotsky argues that mental activity is influenced by culture, specifically, cultural tools that are shared by members of a culture (Robbins, 2005; Vygotsky, 1978). Cultural tools include physical items such as computers, pencils, and paper but also ways of thinking about phenomena, including how to approach math and scientific problems. Spoken language is a vital cultural tool of thought. Children learn how to use the tools of their culture by interacting with skilled partners who provide guidance. For example, suppose a child wanted to bake cookies for the first time. Rather than send the child into the kitchen alone, we would probably accompany the child and provide the tools needed to accomplish the task, such as the ingredients, a rolling pin to roll the dough, cookie cutters, and a baking sheet. We would probably show the child how to use each tool, such as how to roll out the dough, and watch as he or she does it, scaffolding his or her learning. With interaction and experience, the child adopts and internalizes the tools and knowledge, becoming able to apply it independently. Both the learner and teacher contribute mutually (Rogoff, 2015). Vygotsky argued that in this way, culturally valued ways of thinking and problem solving get passed on to children.
Guided Participation and Scaffolding
Children learn through social experience, by interacting with more experienced partners who provide assistance in completing tasks. Children learn through guided participation (also known as an apprenticeship in thinking), a form of sensitive teaching in which the partner is attuned to the needs of the child and helps him or her to accomplish more than the child could do alone (Rogoff, 2014). As novices, children learn from more skilled, or expert, partners by observing them and asking questions. In this way, children are apprentices, learning how others approach problems. The expert partner provides scaffolding that permits the child to bridge the gap between his or her current competence level and the task at hand (Mermelshtine, 2017). For example, consider a child working on a jigsaw puzzle. She is stumped, unable to complete it on her own. Suppose a more skilled partner, such as an adult, sibling, or another child who has more experience with puzzles, provides a little bit of assistance, a scaffold. The expert partner might point to an empty space on the puzzle and encourage the child to find a piece that fits that spot. If the child remains stumped, the partner might point out a piece or rotate it to help the child see the relationship. The partner acts to motivate the child and provide support to help the child finish the puzzle, emphasizing that they are working together. The child novice and expert partner interact to accomplish the goal and the expert adjusts his or her responses to meet the needs of the child.
Scaffolding occurs in formal educational settings, but also informally, any time a partner adjusts his or her interactional style to fit the needs of a child and guide the child to complete a task that he or she could not complete alone (Rogoff, Callanan, Gutiérrez, & Erickson, 2016). Mothers vary their scaffolding behaviors in response to children’s attempts at tasks. For example, they spontaneously use different behaviors depending on the child’s attention skills, using more verbal engagement, strategic questions, verbal hints, and verbal prompts when children show difficulty paying attention during a task (Robinson, Burns, & Davis, 2009). Moreover, maternal reading, scaffolding, and verbal guidance are associated with 2- to 4-year-olds’ capacities for cognitive control and planning (Moriguchi, 2014). Parents and child care providers often provide this informal instruction, but anyone who is more skilled at a given task, including older siblings and peers, can promote children’s cognitive development (Rogoff et al., 2016). Collaboration with more skilled peers improves performance on cognitive tasks such as card-sorting tasks, Piagetian tasks, planning, and academic tasks (Sills, Rowse, & Emerson, 2016).
Zone of Proximal Development
As Vygotsky (1978) explained, “What the child can do in cooperation today, he can do alone tomorrow.” Effective scaffolding works within the zone of proximal development, the gap between the child’s competence level—what he can accomplish independently—and what he can do with assistance of a skilled partner. With time, the child internalizes the scaffolding lesson and learns to accomplish the task on her own—and her zone of proximal development shifts, as shown in Figure 7.5. Adults tend to naturally provide children with instruction within the zone of proximal development (Rogoff, 2014). For example, adults reading a book to a child tend to point to items, label and describe characters’ emotional states, explain, ask questions, listen, and respond sensitively, helping the child understand challenging material that is just beyond what the child can understand on his or her own (Silva, Strasser, & Cain, 2014).
Parents’ guidance acts as a scaffold within the zone of proximal development to help children accomplish challenging tasks. Soon children become able to complete the task independently.
iStock/XiXinXing
