3.1.3.2.4 McGarrigle and Donaldson's naughty teddy study Quiz: AQA Psychology, Unit 3

The 20 questions

1. What did McGarrigle and Donaldson's naughty teddy study show?

   • Children conserved number more often when the change looked accidental than when it was deliberate
   • Children conserved number equally often in both conditions, so the teddy made no difference
   • Children never conserved number, whatever the reason for the change or who made it
   • Children conserved number only after reaching the formal operational stage of thinking

2. In the naughty teddy study, what was the key difference between the two conditions?

   • Whether the child was allowed to touch the counters during the task
   • How many counters were used in the row for the child to count
   • Whether the counters were coloured red or blue for the task
   • Whether the rearrangement looked deliberate or accidental

3. Why did McGarrigle and Donaldson's findings challenge Piaget's view?

   • Children showed conservation in a meaningful context, suggesting Piaget underestimated their ability
   • Children became more egocentric when the task was made familiar, which supported Piaget's view
   • Children performed exactly as Piaget predicted in every condition of the study, with no surprises
   • Children showed no conservation at all in any condition, which supported Piaget's view fully

4. A 5-year-old watches a naughty teddy mix up a row of counters. Which answer would support McGarrigle and Donaldson's findings?

   • The child refuses to answer any question at all during the whole task
   • The child says the number changed because the teddy moved them around
   • The child counts only the counters on the left side of the row
   • The child says the number is unchanged because the teddy only moved them

5. Which methodological feature is central to the naughty teddy study?

   • It removed every child who showed conservation from the final sample
   • It used a familiar, meaningful scenario rather than an abstract adult-led test
   • It used only adult volunteers who had already reached formal operations
   • It was carried out with no props or materials of any kind at all

6. Which criticism best applies to the naughty teddy study?

   • It proves that conservation is innate and never develops with age
   • It has no link to research on conservation at all
   • Its findings may depend on the particular task and the teddy's role as a cue
   • It shows that all children reach formal operational thinking by age seven

7. What does the naughty teddy study suggest about the role of context in children's reasoning?

   • Context matters only for adults and not for children, who respond the same way in any task
   • Meaning and context can help children show abilities that seem absent in abstract tests
   • Context has no effect on children's performance on logic tasks, whatever the story attached to them
   • Children perform best when tasks are as abstract as possible and free of any story or character

8. Which change would be most likely to reduce a child's conservation answer in the teddy task?

   • The row contains the same counters as before the change, with nothing moved or rearranged
   • The experimenter deliberately rearranges the counters while looking at the child
   • The teddy is described as naughty before the task starts, so the child expects a mix-up
   • The teddy accidentally knocks the counters out of line while the child is watching the row

9. In the naughty teddy study, what did a child's answer about number reveal?

   • Whether they liked the teddy or not, and whether they wanted to play with it afterwards
   • Whether they could draw a picture of the teddy and the counters from memory afterwards
   • How many counters they could name in order from left to right across the whole table
   • Whether they judged the number from the change or from what seemed to be the intention behind it

10. Which conclusion would be consistent with the naughty teddy study?

    • Young children always show conservation whatever the task, with no difference between tasks
    • Young children may show conservation earlier in a meaningful task than in a standard Piagetian one
    • Young children cannot tell whether a change is accidental or deliberate in any situation at all
    • Young children never show conservation until about age twelve, whatever the task used

11. Which of these would be a reasonable follow-up study to test the naughty teddy findings?

    • Repeat the task with the same teddy and the same counters, changing nothing else at all
    • Ask children to describe a picture of the room from another viewpoint across the table
    • Ask children to name the colours of the counters in the row from left to right
    • Repeat the task with a different character causing the change, and compare the results

12. A researcher uses a naughty teddy in a conservation task but tells the child the teddy is kind. What is the most likely effect on the results?

    • The results will be identical because the teddy's personality does not matter
    • The children will lose their ability to count at all
    • More children will show conservation because the change now looks accidental
    • Fewer children may show conservation because the change now looks deliberate

13. Which group of children was typically tested in the naughty teddy study?

    • Adults who had reached formal operational thinking
    • Babies in the sensorimotor stage
    • Teenagers who were studying psychology
    • Children of about four to six years old

14. Which result from the naughty teddy study would most challenge Piaget's stage ages?

    • Children in the concrete operational stage refusing all conservation questions asked
    • Children in the formal operational stage answering as conserving in every task given
    • Children in the sensorimotor stage naming objects accurately and in the right order
    • Children in the pre-operational stage answering as conserving when the change looked accidental

15. Why might a child's answer change between a deliberate and an accidental rearrangement?

    • The child has forgotten how to count the counters that are laid out in front of them
    • The child interprets the adult's deliberate change as a trick or a different question
    • The child is fully in the formal operational stage and so reasons differently from before
    • The child has lost their ability to see the counters clearly from where they sit

16. Which statement best describes the naughty teddy study's contribution to the psychology of conservation?

    • It showed that children never understand numbers before they start school at all
    • It showed that conservation is entirely genetic and cannot be influenced by experience
    • It showed that the way a task is presented can change children's conservation answers
    • It showed that conservation tests have no effect on children's answers in any way

17. Which measure would a researcher record in the teddy condition to test conservation?

    • Whether the child can explain in detail how the teddy was made and who made it
    • How quickly the child can draw the counters from memory after the change is made
    • Whether the child says the number of counters is the same after the change
    • Whether the child can name the teddy's favourite colour and say why it likes that colour

18. Which feature of the naughty teddy study made it different from standard conservation tasks?

    • It tested only children who had already failed the standard task before
    • It removed all counters from the task so children answered without objects
    • It added a familiar character and a story-like reason for the change
    • It required children to write down their answers rather than say them aloud

19. Which conclusion would be too strong based on the naughty teddy study?

    • Children may conserve number more readily in a meaningful context
    • Children's answers can be affected by whether a change looks intentional
    • Context can influence the results of conservation tasks
    • Children always conserve number as soon as a character is involved

20. A child says the number of counters changed after a naughty teddy mixed them up. Which Piagetian idea does this answer most resemble?

    • The child is showing reversibility of thought by mentally undoing the rearrangement of counters
    • The child is showing accommodation of a new schema for counting that the teddy has taught
    • The child is showing formal operational reasoning about the rules of counting in general
    • The child is focusing on the visible rearrangement rather than on conservation

Related quizzes

• Brain structures from the womb: brain stem, thalamus, cerebellum, cortex Quiz · 3.1.3.1.1 · 20 questions
• Roles of nature and nurture in development Quiz · 3.1.3.1.2 · 20 questions
• Assimilation and accommodation Quiz · 3.1.3.2.1 · 20 questions
• The four stages: sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational, formal operational Quiz · 3.1.3.2.2 · 20 questions
• Reduction of egocentricity and development of conservation Quiz · 3.1.3.2.3 · 20 questions
• Hughes' policeman doll study Quiz · 3.1.3.2.5 · 20 questions
• Application of Piaget's stages in education Quiz · 3.1.3.2.6 · 20 questions
• Dweck's mindset theory: fixed and growth mindset Quiz · 3.1.3.3.1 · 20 questions
• Role of praise and self-efficacy beliefs in learning Quiz · 3.1.3.3.2 · 20 questions
• Learning styles: verbalisers and visualisers Quiz · 3.1.3.3.3 · 20 questions