3 Matching Annotations
  1. Sep 2023
    1. But there is also work on children’s understanding of the physical world, starting in infancy and proceeding all the way through adolescence, (e.g., Baillargeon 2008;Smith, Wiser & Carey 1985; Vosniadou & Brewer 1992; Xu 2009) and recently there has been increasing research on children’s intuitive theories of the social world

      I would like to know the differences between how children understand their physical world vs their social world. In their understanding of their physical world, they can use casual experimentation to quickly understand basic physics. For example, if they were to push a ball off a table, it would fall. I'm curious to dive deeper into how they engage in similar experimentation to comprehend the intricacies of social rules. Unlike the predictability of a ball falling when pushed off a table, the outcomes of social experiments may vary, especially as they involve interactions with different individuals or repeated attempts.

    2. we think that even newborn infants may have innate intuitive theories and those theories are subject to revision even in infancy itself

      I support the statement that newborn infants may have innate intuitive theories that are subject to revision even in infancy itself. Infants are born with certain cognitive mechanisms and innate knowledge that help them make sense of the world from a very early age. These intuitive theories, such as those related to object permanence or basic physics, serve as the foundation for their understanding of the environment. However, as infants interact with the world, they continually refine and revise these theories based on their experiences and observations. This process of theory revision is a fundamental aspect of cognitive development, demonstrating the remarkable adaptability and learning capabilities of even the youngest humans.

      References Moore, M. K., & Meltzoff, A. N. (1999, November). New findings on Object permanence: A developmental difference between two types of occlusion. The British journal of developmental psychology.

    3. The theory theory claimed that important conceptual structures were like everyday theories and that cognitive development was like theory revision in science.

      The idea that important conceptual structures are like everyday theories makes a lot of sense to me. It suggests that as we navigate through life, we constantly form hypotheses or mental models about how things work, wether its about weather patterns, social situations, or even how a car works.

      Likewise, the comparison to theory revision in science strikes a chord with me. In both cognitive development and scientific progress, our initial assumptions and beliefs are subject to change based on new information and experiences. This adaptive process of "theory revision" is fundamental to our growth and understanding of how the world works.

      This excerpt highlights the dynamic nature of human cognition and the continuous refinement of our mental frameworks. It exemplifies the idea that learning and development are ongoing, iterative processes that never stops.