pdf
FLIP
Authors who publish in this journal agree to the following terms:
Acta Colombiana de Psicología complies with international intellectual property and copyright laws, and particularly with Article No. 58 of the Political Constitution of Colombia, Law No. 23 of 1982, and the Agreement No. 172 of September 30, 2010 (Universidad Católica de Colombia Intellectual Property Regulation).
Authors retain their copyright and grant to the Acta Colombiana de Psicología the right of first publication, with the work registered under Creative Commons attribution license, which allows third parties to use the published material, provided they credit the authorship of the work and the first publication in this Journal.
Abstract
The aim of this study is to identify patterns of the cognitive planning process of young children emerging in the context of a problem solving task. Using a complex dynamic systems approach, this paper depicts the main features of cognitive planning in the short term. Participants were 45 preschool children (aged 3.5 and 3.6 years) of which two case studies are described in detail. The microgenetic method was used to capture, in two months, the planning process in real time during six sessions of data collection. Thus, 96 measuring points were obtained for each child of the sample. The instrument used was a problem solving task in a virtual format, which requires the development of a plan to attain the goal. The first part of the analysis characterizes the children’s planning performance by means of cluster analysis. Two clusters were identified as a result of this analysis. In order to illustrate the performance of the sample, one child from each cluster was randomly selected as a case study. The second part of the analysis describes the two case studies. The State Space Grids (SSG) technique was used to show the short-term emergence of cognitive planning. Results of the case studies revealed two types of performance: a reduction pattern and a stable pattern of cognitive planning. These patterns indicate the ability of children to integrate the constraints of the task and consider future states in their actions. In contrast to the literature, the findings of this study reveal the resources in planning skills of preschoolers, such as self-regulation of actions aimed at attaining a goal and anticipation of future states.
Keywords:
References
Adolph, K, Robinson S., Young, J, Gil Álvarez, F. (2008). What is the shape of developmental Change, Psychological Review 115(3), 527–543.
Atance, C. M. (2008). Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17 (4), 295-298.
Atance, C. M., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2005). My future self: Young children’s ability to anticipate and explain future states. Cognitive Development, 20, 341–361.
Baker-Sennett, J., Matusov, E., & Rogoff, B. (2008). Children’s planning of classroom plays with Adult or child Direction. Social Development, 17(4), 998-1018.
Baughman, F., & Cooper, R. (2007). Inhibition and Young children’s performance on the Tower of London Task. Cognitive Systems Research 8(3) 216-226.
Berg, W.K., Byrd, D.L., McNamara, J.P.H., & Case, K. (2010). Deconstructing the tower: Parameters and predictors of problem difficulty on the Tower of London task. Brain and Cognition, 72, 472-482
Bishop, D. V. M., Aamodt-Leeper, G., Creswell, C., McGurk, R., & Skuse, D. H. (2001). Differences in Cognitive Planning on the Tower of Hanoi Task: Neuropsychological Maturity or Measurement Error? Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatric, 42(4), 551-556.
Bull, R., Espy, K. A., & Senn, T. E. (2004). A comparison of performance on the Towers of London and Hanoi in young children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45,(4), 743-754.
Cazzato, V., Basso, D., Cutini, S., & Bisiacchi, P. S. (2010). Gender differences in visuospatial planning: An eye movements study. Behavioral Brain Research, 206(2), 177-183.
Chen, Y., & Keen, R. (2010). Movement planning reflects skill level and age changes in toddlers. Child Development, 81(6), 1846–1858.
Claxton, L., McCarty, M., & Keen, R. (2009). Self-directed action affects planning in tool-use task with toddlers. Infant Behavior & Development, 32, 230-233.
Colunga, E., & Smith, L. (2008). Flexibility and variability: Essential to human cognition and the study of human cognition New Ideas in Psychology, 26 174–192.
Combariza, E., Puche-Navarro, R. (2009). ¿Entonces, es multifractal la variabilidad? El uso de la wavelet para el estudio de los funcionamientos inferenciales en niños pequeños. En R., Puche-Navarro (comp.), ¿Es la mente no lineal? [Is the mind not lineal](pp. 111-135). Fondo Editorial de la Universidad del Valle.
Cox, R., & Smitsman, A. (2006). Action planning in young children’s tool use. Developmental Science, 9(6), 628-641.
Fischer, K. W., & Bidell, T. R. (2006). Dynamic development of action, thought and emotion. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Theoretical models of human development Handbook of child psychology (6th ed., Vol. 1, pp. 313-399). New York: Wiley.
Granott, N., Fischer, K.W., & Parziale, J. (in press). Bridging to the unknown: A fundamental mechanism in learning and problem-solving. In N. Granott & J. Parziale (Eds.), Microdevelopment. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
Guevara, M., van Dijk, M., & van Geert, P. (2014, May). Building knowledge together: How communication and interaction in dyads supports scientific reasoning skills. Presented at the symposium ‘Peer interaction and Development’. 44th Annual Meeting of Jean Piaget Society, San Francisco, CA.
Guevara, M. & Puche-Navarro, R. (2009). ¿Avanza y cambia la psicología del desarrollo hacia los sistemas dinámicos no lineales? [Is developmental psychology advancing and changing towards the nonlinear dynamic systems?] Revista Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 27(2), 327-340.
Hollenstein, T. (2007). State space grids: Analyzing dynamics across development. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 31, 384-396.
Hollenstein, T., Granic, I., Stoolmiller, M., & Snyder, J. (2004). Rigidity in parent-child interactions and the development of externalizing and internalizing behavior in early childhood. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 595-607.
Howe, M.L. & Lewis, M.D. (2005). The importance of dynamic systems approaches for understanding development. Developmental Review, 25(3-4), 247-251.
Hudson, J. A., Mayhew, E. M. Y., & Prabhakar, J. (2011). The development of episodic foresight: Emerging concepts and methods. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 40, 95–137.
Kagan, J. (2008). In defense of qualitative changes in development, Child Development, 79, 1606-1624.
Kaller, C. P., Rahm, B., Spreer, J., Mader, I., & Unterrainer, J. M. (2008). Thinking around the corner: The development of planning abilities. Brain and Cognition, 67, 360-370.
Kelso, J. A. S. (2000). Principles of dynamic pattern formation and change for a science of human behavior. In L. R. Bergman, R. B. Cairns, L. Nilsson, & L. Nystedt (Eds.), Developmental science and the holistic approach (pp. 63–83). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Kuhn, D. & Dean, D. (2004) Connecting scientific reasoning and causal inference Journal of cognition and development 5(2) 261-288.
Kuhn, D. (1989). Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychological Review, 96, 674- 689.
Kunnen, S. & van Geert, P (2011). A Dynamic Systems Approach of Adolescent Development. In Kunnen, E.S. (Ed.), A dynamic systems approach to adolescent development. London-New York: Psychology Press (pp. 3-14).
Lamey, A., Hollenstein, T., Lewis, M.D., & Granic, I. (2004). GridWare (Version 1.1). [Computer software]. http://statespacegrids.org .
Lewis, M. D., Lamey, A. V., & Douglas, L. (1999). A new dynamic systems method for the analysis of early socioemotional development. Developmental Science, 2(4), 457–475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-7687.00090 .
Matute, E., Chamorro, Y., Inozemtseva, O., Barrios, O., Rosselli, M., & Ardila A. (2008). Efecto de la edad en una tarea de planificación y organización en escolares [Effect of age on task planning and school organization]. Rev Neurol, 47, 61-70.
McCormack, T., & Atance (2011). Planning in young children: A review. Developmental Review, 31(1), 1-31.
Meindertsma, H. B., van Dijk, M. W., Steenbeek, H. W., & van Geert, P. L. (2013). Assessment of Preschooler’s Scientific Reasoning in Adult–Child Interactions: What Is the Optimal Context? Research in Science Education, 1-23.
Miller, P. H. & Coyle, T. R. (1999). Developmental change: Lessons from microgenesis. En E. K. Scholnick, K. Nelson, S. A. Gelman & P. H. Miller (Eds.), Conceptual development. Piaget’s legacy.
Morganti F., Carassa A., Geminiani G. (2007) Planning optimal paths: A simple assessment of survey spatial knowledge in virtual environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(4), 1982P-1996.
Newman, S.D., Greco, J.A., Lee, D. (2009). An fMRI study of the Tower of London: A look at problem structure differences. Brain Research, 1286, 123-132.
Pea, R. D. (1982). What is planning development the development of? New Directions for Child Development: Children’s Planning Strategies, 18, 5–27.
Phillips, L.H., Wynn, V.E., McPherson, S. & Gilhooly, K.J. (2001). Mental planning and the Tower of London task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 54, 579-598.
Prabhakar, J., & Hudson, J. A. (2014). The development of future thinking: Young children’s ability to construct event sequences to achieve future goals. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2014.02.004 .
Puche-Navarro, R. (2000). Formación de herramientas científicas en el niño pequeño [Emergence of scientific tools in the young child]. Bogotá: Arango Editores.
Puche-Navarro, R., Combariza, E. & Ossa, J. C. (2012). La naturaleza no lineal de los funcionamientos inferenciales: Un estudio empírico con base en el humor gráfico [The nonlinear nature of the inferential performances: An empirical study based on the graphic humor]. Avances en Psicología Latinoamericana, 30(1) 27-38.
Rattermann, M. J., Spector, L., Grafman, J., Levin, H. and Harward, H. (2001), Partial and total-order planning: Evidence from normal and prefrontally damaged populations. Cognitive Science, 25, 941–975. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog2506_3.
Rojas, T. (2006). Planificación cognitiva en la primera infancia: Una revisión bibliográfica [Cognitive planning in early childhood: a literature review]. Acta Colombiana de Psicología, 9(2), 101-114.
Rose, L. T. & Fischer, K. W. (2009) Dynamic Development: a neo-Piagetian perspective. En: J. I. M.Carpendale & U.Mueller (eds), The Cambridge Companion to Piaget (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press), pp. 400–421.
Siegler, R. S. (2002). Variability and infant development. Infant Behavior & Development 25, 550–557.
Siegler, R. S. (2006). Microgenetic analyses of learning. En W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Series Eds.) & D. Kuhn & R. S. Siegler (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Volume 2: Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 464-510). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
Siegler, R.S., & Crowley, K. (1991). The microgenetic method: A direct means for studying cognitive development. American Psychologist, 46, 606–620.
Spencer, J.P. & Perone, S. (2008). Defending qualitative change: The view from dynamical systems theory. Child Development, 79, 1639-1647.
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge (MA): Bradford Books/MIT Press.
van Dijk, M. & van Geert, P. (2015). The nature and meaning of intraindividual variability in development in the early life span. In D. Manfred, K. Hooker, & M.J. Sliwinkski (Eds.), Handbook of Intraindividual Variability across the Life Span. (pp. 37-58). Routledge. Taylor and Francis group.
van Dijk, M. & van Geert, P. (2011). Heuristic techniques for the analysis of variability as a dynamic aspect of change. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 34(2), 151-168.
van Dijk, M. & van Geert, P. (2007). Wobbles, humps and sudden jumps: A case study of continuity, discontinuity and variability in early language development. Infant and Child Development, 16, 7-33.
van Geert, P. (2003). Dynamic systems approaches and modeling of developmental processes. In J. Valsiner and K. J. Conolly (Eds.), Handbook of developmental Psychology. London: Sage. pp. 640-672.
van Geert, P., & van Dijk, M. (2002). Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in developmental data. Infant Behavior and Development, 25(4), 340-374.
Yan, Z., & Fischer, K. (2002). Paper human development. Always under construction, dynamic variations in adult cognitive microdevelopment. Human Development, 45, 141-160.
Zimmerman, C. (2007). The development of scientific thinking skills in elementary and middle school. Developmental Review, 27, 172-223.
Reference by
