Lesson 4.3.4.3
4.3.4.3 Baillargeon's research on early infant abilities Quiz: AQA Psychology, Unit 3
20 questions
In partnership with Revision Ninja
Lesson 4.3.4.3, Baillargeon's research on early infant abilities: 20 multiple choice questions for the AQA Psychology (7182), Unit 3: Issues and options in Psychology, written with Revision Ninja.
Host it live on the board and students join with a game code on their own devices, or revise alone with Free Play. The answers are revealed in the game.
The 20 questions
-
What is Baillargeon's research best known for?
- Developing the Bem Sex Role Inventory
- Showing that children never imitate adults
- Showing that infants cannot perceive any objects before the age of two
- Showing that very young infants have knowledge of the physical world, using violation of expectation methods
-
What is the violation of expectation method?
- Measuring the chemical content of an infant's saliva
- Measuring how much an infant cries when a parent leaves the room
- Measuring how long infants look at events that are either consistent or inconsistent with physical expectations
- Measuring the speed at which an infant can crawl across a surface
-
Which measure is typically used in violation of expectation studies?
- Looking time
- Reaction time to a button press
- Number of words spoken
- Height and weight at birth
-
What did violation of expectation studies suggest about infants and object permanence?
- Infants understand object permanence only after learning language
- Infants may understand that hidden objects continue to exist much earlier than Piaget proposed
- Infants cannot understand object permanence at any age
- Infants have no understanding of hidden objects until they are seven years old
-
What is solidity in the context of infant knowledge?
- The understanding that a surface must be flat to hold an object
- The understanding that solid objects are always heavier than liquids
- The understanding that one solid object cannot pass through another
- The understanding that a solid object becomes liquid when heated
-
A study shows an infant longer looking time at a ball that appears to pass through a solid wall. What does this suggest?
- The infant was bored and looked away from the event
- The infant preferred the colour of the wall to the ball
- The infant expected the solid wall to block the ball, so the event was surprising
- The infant had no expectations about the ball
-
How does Baillargeon's research challenge Piaget's theory?
- It shows that infants have no physical knowledge at any stage
- It shows that Piaget's theory is entirely accurate for every infant
- It confirms that infants cannot understand physical events until adulthood
- It suggests that infants have physical knowledge earlier than Piaget claimed, so Piaget may have underestimated infants
-
Why is the violation of expectation method useful with infants?
- Infants can be tested only with written questionnaires
- Infants must be asked to press buttons to show their knowledge
- Infants can answer detailed questions about the physical world
- Infants cannot speak or follow instructions, so looking behaviour gives a non-verbal measure of their understanding
-
Which evaluation of violation of expectation research is most appropriate?
- It shows that infants cannot learn anything before the age of two
- It shows that looking time is always a measure of boredom
- It provides strong evidence of early knowledge, but the interpretation of looking time can be debated
- It proves beyond doubt that infants understand all physical rules
-
A researcher finds that infants look longer when a toy is 'lifted' through a barrier that should have stopped it. What is the most likely explanation?
- The infants preferred the sound of the barrier
- The infants expected the barrier to stop the toy and found the event surprising
- The infants were asleep during the event
- The infants were not looking at the toy at all
-
What does 'knowledge of the physical world' refer to in Baillargeon's work?
- An early understanding of physical properties such as objects continuing to exist and not passing through one another
- An understanding of the moral rules of right and wrong
- An understanding of social rules about how people should behave
- An understanding of gender roles in the family
-
Why might a researcher repeat a violation of expectation study with different events?
- To ensure that no infant looks at the event at all
- To check that the infants' surprise is specific to physical violations rather than to any unusual event
- To make the study take longer than necessary
- To remove the need for control events
-
A critic says violation of expectation results could be explained by infants simply looking longer at novel stimuli. Which evaluation does this make?
- A proof that violation of expectation research is useless
- A valid alternative explanation that researchers must control for in their designs
- A confirmation that infants understand physics completely
- A reason to abandon looking time as a measure altogether
-
Which statement best describes what Baillargeon's research suggests about development?
- Infants have a fully adult understanding of all physical events
- Development in infancy is random and cannot be studied
- Infants learn nothing about the physical world until they can talk
- Some understanding of the physical world may be present earlier than traditional stage theories proposed
-
In a violation of expectation study, which result would support the claim that an infant understands object permanence?
- Shorter looking at the impossible event than at the possible event
- Crying when the object is hidden from view
- Equal looking at a hidden object that is present and at one that disappears
- Longer looking at a hidden object that appears to vanish when it should still be there
-
Which study design would best test whether infants understand that objects cannot pass through solid barriers?
- A violation of expectation design comparing a possible event with an impossible one and measuring looking time
- A survey asking parents whether their infants like solid toys
- A longitudinal study of infants' height over ten years
- A case study of one infant's language development
-
What is a strength of Baillargeon's approach compared with Piaget's clinical method?
- It relies on children's verbal explanations of their thinking
- It requires children to complete long written tests
- It cannot be replicated by other researchers
- It is controlled and can use non-verbal measures that avoid the need for infants to answer questions
-
Which of these is a limitation of violation of expectation research?
- It uses only questionnaires with parents
- It can only be used with adults and not with infants
- It cannot test any physical knowledge at all
- Differences in looking time may have several explanations, so the results need careful interpretation
-
A researcher argues that infants' early physical knowledge shows that development is more continuous than Piaget suggested. Which is the strongest supporting evidence?
- Physical knowledge shown in infants well before the ages Piaget gave for it
- Infants who cannot yet talk showing no interest in objects
- Adolescents reasoning about abstract hypotheses
- Children aged seven performing conservation tasks
-
Why do researchers use control events in violation of expectation studies?
- To make the study run for longer so that more data are collected
- To check that the infants' longer looking reflects the violated physical rule rather than the mere appearance of the event
- To ensure that infants never look at the test event
- To remove the need for a measure of looking time
Related quizzes
- Gender and culture: universality and bias Quiz · 4.3.1.1 · 20 questions
- Free will and determinism Quiz · 4.3.1.2 · 20 questions
- The nature-nurture debate Quiz · 4.3.1.3 · 20 questions
- Holism and reductionism Quiz · 4.3.1.4 · 20 questions
- Idiographic and nomothetic approaches Quiz · 4.3.1.5 · 20 questions
- Social sensitivity in psychological research Quiz · 4.3.1.6 · 20 questions
- Attraction in romantic relationships Quiz · 4.3.2.1 · 20 questions
- Theories of romantic relationships and relationship breakdown Quiz · 4.3.2.2 · 20 questions
- Online and parasocial relationships Quiz · 4.3.2.3 · 20 questions
- Chromosomes, hormones and diversity in sex development Quiz · 4.3.3.1 · 20 questions