Cognitive

Jean Piaget
Piaget's (1936) theory of cognitive development explains how a child constructs a mental model of the
world. He disagreed with the idea that intelligence was a fixed trait, and regarded cognitive development
as a process which occurs due to biological maturation and interaction with the environment.

Piaget was employed at the Binet Institute in the 1920s, where his job was to develop French versions of
questions on English intelligence tests. He became intrigued with the reasons children gave for their
wrong answers to the questions that required logical thinking. He believed that these incorrect answers
revealed important differences between the thinking of adults and children.

Piaget (1936) described his work as genetic epistemology (i.e. the origins of thinking). Genetics is the
scientific study of where things come from (their origins). Epistemology is concerned with the basic
categories of thinking, that is to say, the framework or structural properties of intelligence.

What Piaget wanted to do was not to measure how well children could count, spell or solve problems as
a way of grading their I.Q. What he was more interested in was the way in which fundamental concepts
like the very idea of number, time, quantity, causality, justice and so on emerged.

Piaget (1936) was the first psychologist to make a systematic study of cognitive development. His
contributions include a stage theory of child cognitive development, detailed observational studies of
cognition in children, and a series of simple but ingenious tests to reveal different cognitive abilities.

Before Piagets work, the common assumption in psychology was that children are merely less
competent thinkers than adults. Piaget showed that young children think in strikingly different ways
compared to adults.

According to Piaget, children are born with a very basic mental structure (genetically inherited and
evolved) on which all subsequent learning and knowledge is based.

Piaget's Theory Differs From Others In Several Ways:

It is concerned with children, rather than all learners.

It focuses on development, rather than learning per se, so it does not address learning of information
or specific behaviors.

It proposes discrete stages of development, marked by qualitative differences, rather than a gradual
increase in number and complexity of behaviors, concepts, ideas, etc.
The goal of the theory is to explain the mechanisms and processes by which the infant, and then the
child, develops into an individual who can reason and think using hypotheses.

To Piaget, cognitive development was a progressive reorganization of mental processes as a result of

biological maturation and environmental experience. Children construct an understanding of the world
around them, then experience discrepancies between what they already know and what they discover in
their environment.

There Are Three Basic Components To Piaget's Cognitive Theory:

1. Schemas

(building blocks of knowledge).

2. Adaptation processes that enable the transition from one stage to another (equilibrium,
assimilation and accommodation).

3. Stages of Cognitive Development:

o sensorimotor,

o preoperational,

o concrete operational,

o formal operational.

Schemas

Imagine what it would be like if you did not have a mental model of your world. It would mean that you
would not be able to make so much use of information from your past experience, or to plan future
actions.

Schemas are the basic building blocks of such cognitive models, and enable us to form a mental
representation of the world. Piaget (1952) defined a schema as:

'a cohesive, repeatable action sequence possessing component actions that are tightly interconnected
and governed by a core meaning'.

In more simple terms Piaget called the schema the basic building block of intelligent behavior a way of
organizing knowledge. Indeed, it is useful to think of schemas as units of knowledge, each relating to
one aspect of the world, including objects, actions and abstract (i.e. theoretical) concepts.
Wadsworth (2004) suggests that schemata (the plural of schema) be thought of as 'index cards' filed in
the brain, each one telling an individual how to react to incoming stimuli or information.

When Piaget talked about the development of a person's mental processes, he was referring to increases
in the number and complexity of the schemata that a person had learned.

When a child's existing schemas are capable of explaining what it can perceive around it, it is said to be
in a state of equilibrium, i.e. a state of cognitive (i.e. mental) balance.

Piaget emphasized the importance of schemas in cognitive development, and described how they were
developed or acquired. A schema can be defined as a set of linked mental representations of the world,
which we use both to understand and to respond to situations. The assumption is that we store these
mental representations and apply them when needed.

For example, a person might have a schema about buying a meal in a restaurant. The schema is a stored
form of the pattern of behavior which includes looking at a menu, ordering food, eating it and paying the
bill. This is an example of a type of schema called a 'script'. Whenever they are in a restaurant, they
retrieve this schema from memory and apply it to the situation.

The schemas Piaget described tend to be simpler than this - especially those used by infants. He
described how - as a child gets older - his or her schemas become more numerous and elaborate.

Piaget believed that newborn babies have a small number of innate schemas - even before they have
had much opportunity to experience the world. These neonatal schemas are the cognitive structures
underlying innate reflexes. These reflexes are genetically programmed into us.

For example, babies have a sucking reflex, which is triggered by something touching the baby's lips. A
baby will suck a nipple, a comforter (dummy), or a person's finger. Piaget therefore assumed that the
baby has a 'sucking schema'.

Similarly the grasping reflex which is elicited when something touches the palm of a baby's hand, or the
rooting reflex, in which a baby will turn its head towards something which touches its cheek, are innate
schemas. Shaking a rattle would be the combination of two schemas, grasping and shaking.

Assimilation and Accommodation

Jean Piaget (1952; see also Wadsworth, 2004) viewed intellectual growth as a process
of adaptation (adjustment) to the world. This happens through:

Assimilation

Which is using an existing schema to deal with a new object or situation.

Accommodation

This happens when the existing schema (knowledge) does not work, and needs to be changed to deal
with a new object or situation.
 Equilibration

This is the force which moves development along. Piaget believed that cognitive development did not
progress at a steady rate, but rather in leaps and bounds.

Equilibrium occurs when a child's schemas can deal with most new information through assimilation.
However, an unpleasant state of disequilibrium occurs when new information cannot be fitted into
existing schemas (assimilation).

Equilibration is the force which drives the learning process as we do not like to be frustrated and will
seek to restore balance by mastering the new challenge (accommodation). Once the new information is
acquired the process of assimilation with the new schema will continue until the next time we need to
make an adjustment to it.
Example of Assimilation

A 2 year old child sees a man who is bald on top of his head and has long frizzy hair on the sides. To his
fathers horror, the toddler shouts Clown, clown (Siegler et al., 2003).

Example of Accommodation

In the clown incident, the boys father explained to his son that the man was not a clown and that even
though his hair was like a clowns, he wasnt wearing a funny costume and wasnt doing silly things to
make people laugh.

With this new knowledge, the boy was able to change his schema of clown and make this idea fit
better to a standard concept of clown.

Stages of Development

Piaget proposed four stages of cognitive development which reflect the increasing sophistication of
children's thought:

1. Sensorimotor stage (birth to age 2)

2. Pre-operational stage (from age 2 to age 7)

3. Concrete operational stage (from age 7 to age 11)

4. Formal operational stage (age 11+ - adolescence and adulthood).

Each child goes through the stages in the same order and child development is determined by biological
maturation and interaction with the environment. Although no stage can be missed out there are
individual differences in the rate at which children progress through stages, and some individuals may
never attain the later stages.

Piaget did not claim that a particular stage was reached at a certain age - although descriptions of the
stages often include an indication of the age at which the average child would reach each stage.

Sensorimotor Stage (Birth-2 yrs)

The main achievement during this stage is object permanence - knowing that an object still exists, even if
it is hidden.

It requires the ability to form a mental representation (i.e. a schema) of the object.

Preoperational Stage (2-7 years)

During this stage, young children are able to think about things symbolically. This is the ability to make
one thing - a word or an object - stand for something other than itself.
Thinking is still egocentric, and the infant has difficulty taking the viewpoint of others.

Concrete Operational Stage (7-11 years)

Piaget considered the concrete stage a major turning point in the child's cognitive development, because
it marks the beginning of logical or operational thought.

This means the child can work things out internally in their head (rather than physically try things out in
the real world).

Children can conserve number (age 6), mass (age 7), and weight (age 9). Conservation is the
understanding that something stays the same in quantity even though its appearance changes

Formal Operational Stage (11 years and over)

The formal operational stage begins at approximately age eleven and lasts into adulthood. During this
time, people develop the ability to think about abstract concepts, and logically test hypotheses.

Educational Implications

Piaget (1952) did not explicitly relate his theory to education, although later researchers have explained
how features of Piaget's theory can be applied to teaching and learning.

Piaget has been extremely influential in developing educational policy and teaching practice. For
example, a review of primary education by the UK government in 1966 was based strongly on Piagets
theory. The result of this review led to the publication of the Plowden report (1967).

Discovery learning the idea that children learn best through doing and actively exploring - was seen as
central to the transformation of the primary school curriculum.

'The report's recurring themes are individual learning, flexibility in the curriculum, the centrality of play
in children's learning, the use of the environment, learning by discovery and the importance of the
evaluation of children's progress - teachers should 'not assume that only what is measurable is valuable.'

Because Piaget's theory is based upon biological maturation and stages, the notion of 'readiness' is
important. Readiness concerns when certain information or concepts should be taught. According to
Piaget's theory children should not be taught certain concepts until they have reached the appropriate
stage of cognitive development.

According to Piaget (1958), assimilation and accommodation require an active learner, not a passive one,
because problem-solving skills cannot be taught, they must be discovered.

Within the classroom learning should be student centered a accomplished through active discovery
learning. The role of the teacher is to facilitate learning, rather than direct tuition. Therefore, teachers
should encourage the following within the classroom:
o Focus on the process of learning, rather than the end product of it.

o Using active methods that require rediscovering or reconstructing "truths".

o Using collaborative, as well as individual activities (so children can learn from each other).

o Devising situations that present useful problems, and create disequilibrium in the child.

o Evaluate the level of the child's development, so suitable tasks can be set.

Critical Evaluation

Support

The influence of Piagets ideas in developmental psychology has been enormous. He changed
how people viewed the childs world and their methods of studying children.

He was an inspiration to many who came after and took up his ideas. Piaget's ideas have generated a
huge amount of research which has increased our understanding of cognitive development.

His ideas have been of practical use in understanding and communicating with children,
particularly in the field of education (re: Discovery Learning).

Criticisms

Are the stages real? Vygotsky and Bruner would rather not talk about stages at all, preferring to
see development as a continuous process. Others have queried the age ranges of the stages.
Some studies have shown that progress to the formal operational stage is not guaranteed.

For example, Keating (1979) reported that 40-60% of college students fail at formal operation tasks, and
Dasen (1994) states that only one-third of adults ever reach the formal operational stage.

Because Piaget concentrated on the universal stages of cognitive development and biological
maturation, he failed to consider the effect that the social setting and culture may have on
cognitive development.

Dasen (1994) cites studies he conducted in remote parts of the central Australian desert with 8-14 year
old Aborigines. He gave them conservation of liquid tasks and spatial awareness tasks. He found that the
ability to conserve came later in the aboriginal children, between aged 10 and 13 ( as opposed to
between 5 and 7, with Piagets Swiss sample).

However, he found that spatial awareness abilities developed earlier amongst the Aboriginal children
than the Swiss children. Such a study demonstrates cognitive development is not purely dependent on
maturation but on cultural factors too spatial awareness is crucial for nomadic groups of people.
Vygotsky, a contemporary of Piaget, argued that social interaction is crucial for cognitive development.
According to Vygotsky the child's learning always occurs in a social context in co-operation with someone
more skillful (MKO). This social interaction provides language opportunities and language is the
foundation of thought.

Piagets methods (observation and clinical interviews) are more open to biased interpretation
than other methods. Piaget made careful, detailed naturalistic observations of children, and
from these he wrote diary descriptions charting their development. He also used clinical
interviews and observations of older children who were able to understand questions and hold
conversations.

Because Piaget conducted the observations alone the data collected are based on his own subjective
interpretation of events. It would have been more reliable if Piaget conducted the observations with
another researcher and compared the results afterwards to check if they are similar (i.e. have inter rater
reliability).

Although clinical interviews allow the researcher to explore data in more depth, the interpretation of the
interviewer may be biased. For example, children may not understand the question/s, they have short
attention spans, they cannot express themselves very well and may be trying to please the experimenter.
Such methods meant that Piaget may have formed inaccurate conclusions.

As several studies have shown Piaget underestimated the abilities of children because his tests
were sometimes confusing or difficult to understand (e.g. Hughes, 1975). Piaget failed to
distinguish between competence (what a child is capable of doing) and performance (what a
child can show when given a particular task). When tasks were altered, performance (and
therefore competence) was affected. Therefore, Piaget may have underestimated childrens
cognitive abilities.

For example a child might have object permanence (competence) but still not be able to search for
objects (performance). When Piaget hid objects from babies he found that it wasnt till after 9 months
that they looked for it. However, Piaget relied on manual search methods whether the child was
looking for the object or not.

Later, research such as Baillargeon and Devos (1991) reported that infants as young as 4 months looked
longer at a moving carrot that didnt do what it expected, suggesting they had some sense of
permanence, otherwise they wouldnt have had any expectation of what it should or shouldnt do.

The concept of schema is incompatible with the theories of Bruner (1966) and Vygotsky
(1978). Behaviorism would also refute Piagets schema theory because is cannot be directly
observed as it is an internal process. Therefore, they would claim it cannot be objectively
measured.

Piaget studied his own children and the children of his colleagues in Geneva in order to deduce
general principles about the intellectual development of all children. Not only was his sample
 very small, but it was composed solely of European children from families of high socio-
economic status. Researchers have therefore questioned the generalisability of his data.

For Piaget, language is seen as secondary to action, i.e. thought precedes language. The Russian
psychologist Lev Vygotsky (1978) argues that the development of language and thought go
together and that the origin of reasoning is more to do with our ability to communicate with
others than with our interaction with the material world.

Tolman - Latent Learning

The behaviorists stated that psychology should study actual observable behavior, and that nothing
happens between stimulus and response (i.e. no cognitive processes take place).

Edward Tolman (1948) challenged these assumptions by proposing that people and animals are
active information processes and not passive learners as behaviorism had suggested. Tolman developed
a cognitive view of learning that has become popular in modern psychology.

Tolman believed individuals do more than merely respond to stimuli; they act on beliefs, attitudes,
changing conditions, and they strive toward goals. Tolman is virtually the only behaviorists who found
the stimulus-response theory unacceptable, because reinforcement was not necessary for learning to
occur. He felt behavior was mainly cognitive.

Tolman coined the term cognitive map, which is an internal representation (or image) of external
environmental feature or landmark. He thought that individuals acquire large numbers of cues (i.e.
signals) from the environment and could use these to build a mental image of an environment (i.e. a
cognitive map).

By using this internal representation of a physical space they could get to the goal by knowing where it is
in a complex of environmental features. Short cuts and changeable routes are possible with this model.

Tolman also worked on latent learning, defined as learning which is not apparent in the learner's
behavior at the time of learning, but which manifests later when a suitable motivation and
circumstances appear. The idea of latent learning was not original to Tolman, but he developed it further.

Tolman and Honzik (1930)

In their famous experiments Tolman and Honzik (1930) built a maze to investigate latent learning in rats.
The study also shows that rats actively process information rather than operating on a stimulus response
relationship.

Procedure

In their study 3 groups of rats had to find their way around a complex maze. At the end of the maze
there was a food box. Some groups of rats got to eat the food, some did not.

Group 1: Rewarded

Day 1 17: Every time they got to end, given food (i.e. reinforced).

Group 2: Delayed Reward

Day 1 - 10: Every time they got to end, taken out.

Day 11 -17: Every time they got to end, given food (i.e. reinforced).

Group 3: No reward

Day 1 17: Every time they got to end, taken out.

Results
The delayed reward group learned the route on days 1 to 10 and formed a cognitive map of the maze.
They took longer to reach the end of the maze because there was no motivation for them to perform.
From day 11 onwards they had a motivation to perform (i.e. food) and reached the end before the
reward group.

This shows that between stimulus (the maze) and response (reaching the end of the maze) a mediational
process was occurring the rats were actively processing information in their brains by mentally using
their cognitive map.

Selective Attention
A bottleneck restricts the rate of flow, as, say, in the narrow neck of a milk bottle. The narrower the
bottleneck, the lower the rate of flow.

Broadbent's, Treisman's, and Deutsch and Deutsch Models of Attention are all bottleneck models
because they predict we cannot consciously attend to all of our sensory input at the same time.

This limited capacity for paying attention is therefore a bottleneck and the models each try to explain
how the material that passes through the bottleneck is selected.

Broadbent's Filter Model

Donald Broadbent is recognized as one of the major contributors to the information processing
approach, which started with his work with air traffic controllers during the war. In that situation a
number of competing messages from departing and incoming aircraft are arriving continuously, all
requiring attention.

The air traffic controller finds s/he can deal effectively with only one message at a time and so has to
decide which is the most important. Broadbent designed an experiment (dichotic listening) to
investigate the processes involved in switching attention which are presumed to be going on internal in
our heads.

Broadbent (1958) argued that information from all of the stimuli presented at any given time enters a
sensory buffer. One of the inputs is then selected on the basis of its physical characteristics for further
processing by being allowed to pass through a filter. Because we have only a limited capacity to process
information, this filter is designed to prevent the information-processing system from becoming
overloaded.

The inputs not initially selected by the filter remain briefly in the sensory buffer, and if they are not
processed they decay rapidly. Broadbent assumed that the filter rejected the non-shadowed or
unattended message at an early stage of processing.
Broadbent >wanted to see how people were able to focus their attention (selectively attend), and to do
this he deliberately overloaded them with stimuli - they had too many signals, too much information to
process at the same time.

One of the ways Broadbent achieved this was by simultaneously sending one message (a 3-digit number)
to a person's right ear and a different message (a different 3-digit number) to their left ear. Participants
were asked to listen to both messages at the same time and repeat what they heard. This is known as a
'dichotic listening task'.
Broadbent was interested in how these would be repeated back. Would the participant repeat the digits
back in the order that they were heard (order of presentation), or repeat back what was heard in one ear
followed by the other ear (ear-by-ear). He actually found that people made fewer mistakes repeating
back ear by ear and would usually repeat back this way.

Resultsfrom this research led Broadbent to produce his 'filter' model of how selective attention
operates. Broadbent concluded that we can pay attention to only one channel at a time - so his is a
single channel model.

In the dichotic listening task each ear is a channel. We can listen either to the right ear (that's one
channel) or the left ear (that's another channel). Broadbent also discovered that it is difficult to switch
channels more than twice a second.

So you can only pay attention to the message in one ear at a time - the message in the other ear is lost,
though you may be able to repeat back a few items from the unattended ear. This could be explained by
the short-term memory store which holds onto information in the unattended ear for a short time.

Broadbent thought that the filter, which selects one channel for attention, does this only on the basis
of PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS of the information coming in: for example, which particular ear the
information was coming to, or the type of voice.

According to Broadbent the meaning of any of the messages is not taken into account at all by the filter.
All SEMANTIC PROCESSING (processing the information to decode the meaning, in other words
understand what is said) is carried out after the filter has selected the channel to pay attention to. So
whatever message is sent to the unattended ear is not understood.
Because we have only a limited capacity to process information, this filter is designed to prevent the
information-processing system from becoming overloaded.

The inputs not initially selected by the filter remain briefly in the sensory buffer store, and if they are not
processed they decay rapidly. Broadbent assumed that the filter rejected the non-shadowed or
unattended message at an early stage of processing.

Evaluation of Broadbent's Model

1. Broadbent's dichotic listening experiments have been criticized because:

The early studies all used people who were unfamiliar with shadowing and so found it very
difficult and demanding. Eysenck & Keane (1990) claim that the inability of naive participants to
shadow successfully is due to their unfamiliarity with the shadowing task rather than an inability
of the attentional system.
 Participants reported after the entire message had been played - it is possible that the
unattended message is analyzed thoroughly but participants forget.

Analysis of the unattended message might occur below the level of conscious awareness. For
example, research by Von Wright et al (1975) indicated analysis of the unattended message in a
shadowing task. A word was first presented to participants with a mild electric shock. When the
same word was later presented to the unattended channel, participants registered an increase in
GSR (indicative of emotional arousal and analysis of the word in the unattended channel).

More recent research has indicated the above points are important: e.g. Moray (1959) studied
the effects of practice. Naive subjects could only detect 8% of digits appearing in either the
shadowed or non-shadowed message, Moray (an experienced 'shadower') detected 67%.

2. Broadbent's theory predicts that hearing your name when you are not paying attention should be
impossible because unattended messages are filtered out before you process the meaning - thus the
model cannot account for the 'Cocktail Party Phenomenon'.

3. Other researchers have demonstrated the 'cocktail party effect' (Cherry, 1953) under experimental
conditions and have discovered occasions when information heard in the unattended ear 'broke through'
to interfere with information participants are paying attention to in the other ear. This implies some
analysis of meaning of stimuli must have occurred prior to the selection of channels. In Broadbent's
model the filter is based solely on sensory analysis of the physical characteristics of the stimuli.

Treisman's Attenuation Model

Selective attention requires that stimuli are filtered so that attention is directed. Broadbent's model
suggests that the selection of material to attend to (that is, the filtering) is made early, before semantic
analysis.

Treisman's (1964) model retains this early filter which works on physical features of the message only.
The crucial difference is that Treisman's filter ATTENUATES rather than eliminates the unattended
material. Attenuation is like turning down the volume so that if you have 4 sources of sound in one room
(TV, radio, people talking, baby crying) you can turn down or attenuate 3 in order to attend to the fourth.

The result is almost the same as turning them off, the unattended material appears lost. But, if a non-
attended channel includes your name, for example, there is a chance you will hear it because the
material is still there.
Treisman agreed with Broadbent that there was a bottleneck, but disagreed with the location. Treisman
carried out experiments using the speech shadowing method. Typically, in this method participants are
asked to simultaneously repeat aloud speech played into one ear (called the attended ear) whilst
another message is spoken to the other ear.

In one shadowing experiment, identical messages were presented to two ears but with a slight delay
between them. If this delay was too long, then participants did not notice that the same material was
played to both ears.

When the unattended message was ahead of the shadowed message by up to 2 seconds, participants
noticed the similarity. If it is assumed the unattended material is held in a temporary buffer store, then
these results would indicate that the duration of material held in sensory buffer store is about 2 seconds.

In an experiment with bilingual participants, Treisman presented the attended message in English and
the unattended message in a French translation. When the French version lagged only slightly behind
the English version, participants could report that both messages had the same meaning.

Clearly, then, the unattended message was being processed for meaning and Broadbent's Filter Model,
where the filter extracted on the basis of physical characteristics only, could not explain these findings.
The evidence suggests that Broadbent's Filter Model is not adequate, it does not allow for meaning
being taken into account.

Treisman's ATTENUATION THEORY, in which the unattended message is processed less thoroughly than
the attended one, suggests processing of the unattended message is attenuated or reduced to a greater
or lesser extent depending on the demands on the limited capacity processing system.

Treisman suggested messages are processed in a systematic way, beginning with analysis of physical
characteristics, syllabic pattern, and individual words. After that, grammatical structure and meaning are
processed.

It will often happen that there is insufficient processing capacity to permit a full analysis of unattended
stimuli. In that case, later analyses will be omitted. This theory neatly predicts that it will usually be the
physical characteristics of unattended inputs which are remembered rather than their meaning.

To be analyzed, items have to reach a certain threshold of intensity All the attended/selected material
will reach this threshold but only some of the attenuated items. Some items will retain a permanently
reduced threshold, for example your own name or words/phrases like 'help' and 'fire'. Other items will
have a reduced threshold at a particular moment if they have some relevance to the main attended
message.

Evaluation of Treisman's Model

1. Treisman's Model overcomes some of the problems associated with Broadbent's Filter Model, e.g. the
Attenuation Model can account for the 'Cocktail Party Syndrome'.

2. Treisman's model does not explain how exactly semantic analysis works.

3. The nature of the attenuation process has never been precisely specified.

4. A problem with all dichotic listening experiments is that you can never be sure that the participants
have not actually switched attention to the so called unattended channel.

Kolb - Learning Styles

David Kolb published his learning styles model in 1984 from which he developed his learning style
inventory.

Kolb's experiential learning theory works on two levels: a four stage cycle of learning and four separate
learning styles. Much of Kolbs theory is concerned with the learners internal cognitive processes.

Kolb states that learning involves the acquisition of abstract concepts that can be applied flexibly in a
range of situations. In Kolbs theory, the impetus for the development of new concepts is provided by
new experiences.
Learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience (Kolb,
1984, p. 38).

The Experiential Learning Cycle

Kolb's experiential learning style theory is typically represented by a four stage learning cycle in which
the learner 'touches all the bases':

1. Concrete Experience - (a new experience of situation is encountered, or a reinterpretation of existing

experience).

2. Reflective Observation (of the new experience. Of particular importance are any inconsistencies
between experience and understanding).

3. Abstract Conceptualization (Reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of an existing

abstract concept).

4. Active Experimentation (the learner applies them to the world around them to see what results).

Effective learning is seen when a person progresses through a cycle of four stages: of (1) having a
concrete experience followed by (2) observation of and reflection on that experience which leads to (3)
the formation of abstract concepts (analysis) and generalizations (conclusions) which are then (4) used to
test hypothesis in future situations, resulting in new experiences.
Kolb (1974) views learning as an integrated process with each stage being mutually supportive of and
feeding into the next. It is possible to enter the cycle at any stage and follow it through its logical
sequence.

However, effective learning only occurs when a learner is able to execute all four stages of the model.
Therefore, no one stage of the cycle is an effective as a learning procedure on its own.

Learning Styles

Kolb's learning theory (1974) sets out four distinct learning styles, which are based on a four-stage
learning cycle (see above). Kolb explains that different people naturally prefer a certain single different
learning style. Various factors influence a person's preferred style. For example, social environment,
educational experiences, or the basic cognitive structure of the individual.

Whatever influences the choice of style, the learning style preference itself is actually the product of two
pairs of variables, or two separate 'choices' that we make, which Kolb presented as lines of axis, each
with 'conflicting' modes at either end:

A typical presentation of Kolb's two continuums is that the east-west axis is called the Processing
Continuum (how we approach a task), and the north-south axis is called the Perception Continuum (our
emotional response, or how we think or feel about it).
Kolb believed that we cannot perform both variables on a single axis at the same time (e.g. think and
feel). Our learning style is a product of these two choice decisions.

It's often easier to see the construction of Kolb's learning styles in terms of a two-by-two matrix. Each
learning style represents a combination of two preferred styles. The diagram also highlights Kolb's
terminology for the four learning styles; diverging, assimilating, and converging, accommodating:

Doing (Active Watching (Reflective

Experimentation - AE) Observation - RO)

Feeling (Concrete Experience -

Accommodating (CE/AE) Diverging (CE/RO)
CE)
 Thinking (Abstract
Converging (AC/AE) Assimilating (AC/RO)
Conceptualization - AC)

Learning Styles Descriptions

Knowing a person's (and your own) learning style enables learning to be orientated according to the
preferred method. That said, everyone responds to and needs the stimulus of all types of learning styles
to one extent or another - it's a matter of using emphasis that fits best with the given situation and a
person's learning style preferences.

Here are brief descriptions of the four Kolb learning styles:

Diverging (feeling and watching - CE/RO)

These people are able to look at things from different perspectives. They are sensitive. They prefer to
watch rather than do, tending to gather information and use imagination to solve problems. They are
best at viewing concrete situations at several different viewpoints.

Kolb called this style 'diverging' because these people perform better in situations that require ideas-
generation, for example, brainstorming. People with a diverging learning style have broad cultural
interests and like to gather information.

They are interested in people, tend to be imaginative and emotional, and tend to be strong in the arts.
People with the diverging style prefer to work in groups, to listen with an open mind and to receive
personal feedback.

Assimilating (watching and thinking - AC/RO)

The Assimilating learning preference is for a concise, logical approach. Ideas and concepts are more
important than people. These people require good clear explanation rather than practical opportunity.
They excel at understanding wide-ranging information and organizing it in a clear logical format.

People with an assimilating learning style are less focused on people and more interested in ideas and
abstract concepts. People with this style are more attracted to logically sound theories than approaches
based on practical value.

This learning style is important for effectiveness in information and science careers. In formal learning
situations, people with this style prefer readings, lectures, exploring analytical models, and having time
to think things through.
Converging (doing and thinking - AC/AE)

People with a converging learning style can solve problems and will use their learning to find solutions to
practical issues. They prefer technical tasks, and are less concerned with people and interpersonal
aspects.

People with a converging learning style are best at finding practical uses for ideas and theories. They can
solve problems and make decisions by finding solutions to questions and problems.

People with a converging learning style are more attracted to technical tasks and problems than social or
interpersonal issues. A converging learning style enables specialist and technology abilities. People with
a converging style like to experiment with new ideas, to simulate, and to work with practical
applications.

Accommodating (doing and feeling - CE/AE)

The Accommodating learning style is 'hands-on', and relies on intuition rather than logic. These people
use other people's analysis, and prefer to take a practical, experiential approach. They are attracted to
new challenges and experiences, and to carrying out plans.

They commonly act on 'gut' instinct rather than logical analysis. People with an accommodating learning
style will tend to rely on others for information than carry out their own analysis. This learning style is
prevalent within the general population.

Educational Implications

Both Kolb's (1984) learning stages and cycle could be used by teachers to critically evaluate the learning
provision typically available to students, and to develop more appropriate learning opportunities.

Educators should ensure that activities are designed and carried out in ways that offer each learner the
chance to engage in the manner that suits them best. Also, individuals can be helped to learn more
effectively by the identification of their lesser preferred learning styles and the strengthening of these
through the application of the experiential learning cycle.

Ideally, activities and material should be developed in ways that draw on abilities from each stage of the
experiential learning cycle and take the students through the whole process in sequence.

Wilhelm Wundt
Wilhelm Wundt opened the Institute for Experimental Psychology at the University of Leipzig in Germany
in 1879. This was the first laboratory dedicated to psychology, and its opening is usually thought of as
the beginning of modern psychology. Indeed, Wundt is often regarded as the father of psychology.

Wundt was important because he separated psychology from philosophy by analyzing the workings of
the mind in a more structured way, with the emphasis being on objective measurement and control.

This laboratory became a focus for those with a serious interest in psychology, first for German
philosophers and psychology students, then for American and British students as well. All subsequent
psychological laboratories were closely modeled in their early years on the Wundt model.

Wundt's background was in physiology, and this was reflected in the topics with which the Institute was
concerned, such as the study of reaction times and sensory processes and attention. For example,
participants would be exposed to a standard stimulus (e.g. a light or the sound of a metronome) and
asked to report their sensations.

Wundt's aim was to record thoughts and sensations, and to analyze them into their constituent
elements, in much the same way as a chemist analyses chemical compounds, in order to get at the
underlying structure. The school of psychology founded by Wundt is known as voluntarism, the process
of organizing the mind.

During his academic career Wundt trained 186 graduate students (116 in psychology). This is significant
as it helped disseminate his work. Indeed, parts of Wundt's theory were developed and promoted by his
one-time student, Edward Titchener, who described his system as Structuralism, or the analysis of the
basic elements that constitute the mind.

Wundt wanted to study the structure of the human mind (using introspection). Wundt believed in
reductionism. That is, he believed consciousness could be broken down (or reduced) to its basic
elements without sacrificing any of the properties of the whole.

Wundt argued that conscious mental states could be scientifically studied using introspection. Wundts
introspection was not a causal affair, but a highly practiced form of self-examination. He trained
psychology students to make observations that were biased by personal interpretation or previous
experience, and used the results to develop a theory of conscious thought.

Highly trained assistants would be given a stimulus such as a ticking metronome and would reflect on
the experience. They would report what the stimulus made them think and feel. The same stimulus,
physical surroundings and instructions were given to each person.

Wundt's method of introspection did not remain a fundamental tool of psychological experimentation
past the early 1920's. His greatest contribution was to show that psychology could be a valid
experimental science.

Therefore, one way Wundt contributed to the development of psychology was to do his research in
carefully controlled conditions, i.e. experimental methods. This encouraged other researchers such as
the behaviorists to follow the same experimental approach and be more scientific. However, today
psychologists (e.g. Skinner) argue that introspection was not really scientific even if the methods used to
introspect were. Skinner claims the results of introspection are subjective and cannot be verified
because only observable behavior can be objectively measured.

Wundt concentrated on three areas of mental functioning; thoughts, images and feelings. These are the
basic areas studied today in cognitive psychology. This means that the study of perceptual processes can
be traced back to Wundt. Wundts work stimulated interest in cognitive psychology.

On the basis of his work, and the influence it had on psychologists who were to follow him, Wundt can
be regarded as the founder of experimental psychology, so securing his place in the history of
psychology. At the same time, Wundt himself believed that the experimental approach was limited in
scope, and that other methods would be necessary if all aspects of human psychology were to be
investigated.

Cognitive Dissonance
Cognitive dissonance refers to a situation involving conflicting attitudes, beliefs or behaviors. This
produces a feeling of discomfort leading to an alteration in one of the attitudes, beliefs or behaviors to
reduce the discomfort and restore balance etc.

For example, when people smoke (behavior) and they know that smoking causes cancer (cognition).

Festinger's (1957) cognitive dissonance theory suggests that we have an inner drive to hold all our
attitudes and beliefs in harmony and avoid disharmony (or dissonance).

Attitudes may change because of factors within the person. An important factor here is the principle of
cognitive consistency, the focus of Festinger's (1957) theory of cognitive dissonance. This theory starts
from the idea that we seek consistency in our beliefs and attitudes in any situation where two cognitions
are inconsistent.

Leon Festinger (1957) proposed cognitive dissonance theory, which states that a powerful motive to
maintain cognitive consistency can give rise to irrational and sometimes maladaptive behavior.

According to Festinger, we hold many cognitions about the world and ourselves; when they clash, a
discrepancy is evoked, resulting in a state of tension known as cognitive dissonance. As the experience of
dissonance is unpleasant, we are motivated to reduce or eliminate it, and achieve consonance (i.e.
agreement).

Cognitive dissonance was first investigated by Leon Festinger, arising out of a participant observation
study of a cult which believed that the earth was going to be destroyed by a flood, and what happened
to its members particularly the really committed ones who had given up their homes and jobs to work
for the cult when the flood did not happen.

While fringe members were more inclined to recognize that they had made fools of themselves and to
"put it down to experience", committed members were more likely to re-interpret the evidence to show
that they were right all along (the earth was not destroyed because of the faithfulness of the cult
members).

How Attitude Change Takes Place

According to cognitive dissonance theory, there is a tendency for individuals to seek consistency among
their cognitions (i.e., beliefs, opinions). When there is an inconsistency between attitudes or behaviors
(dissonance), something must change to eliminate the dissonance.

Dissonance can be reduced in one of three ways:

First, individuals can change one or more of the attitudes, behavior, beliefs etc. so as to make the
relationship between the two elements a consonant one. When one of the dissonant elements is a
behavior, the individual can change or eliminate the behavior. However, this mode of dissonance
reduction frequently presents problems for people, as it is often difficult for people to change well-
learned behavioral responses (e.g. giving up smoking).

A second (cognitive) method of reducing dissonance is to acquire new information that outweighs the
dissonant beliefs. For example, thinking smoking causes lung cancer will cause dissonance if a person
smokes. However, new information such as research has not proved definitely that smoking causes lung
cancer may reduce the dissonance.

A third way to reduce dissonance is to reduce the importance of the cognitions (i.e. beliefs, attitudes). A
person could convince themself that it is better to "live for today" than to "save for tomorrow." In other
words, he could tell himself that a short life filled with smoking and sensual pleasures is better than a
long life devoid of such joys. In this way, he would be decreasing the importance of the dissonant
cognition (smoking is bad for ones health).

Notice that dissonance theory does not state that these modes of dissonance reduction will actually
work, only that individuals who are in a state of cognitive dissonance will take steps to reduce the extent
of their dissonance. One of the points that dissonance theorists are fond of making is that people will go
to all sorts of lengths to reduce dissonance.

The theory of cognitive dissonance has been widely researched in a number of situations to develop the
basic idea in more detail, and various factors that have been identified which may be important in
attitude change.

This research can be divided into three main areas:

1. forced compliance behavior,

2. decision-making,

3. and effort.

We will look at the main findings to have emerged from each area.

Forced Compliance Behavior

When someone is forced to do (publicly) something they (privately) really don't want to do, dissonance
is created between their cognition (I didn't want to do this) and their behavior (I did it).

Forced compliance occurs when an individual performs an action that is inconsistent with his or her
beliefs. The behavior can't be changed, since it was already in the past, so dissonance will need to be
reduced by re-evaluating their attitude to what they have done. This prediction has been tested
experimentally:

In an intriguing experiment, Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) asked participants to perform a series of dull
tasks (such as turning pegs in a peg board for an hour). As you can imagine, participant's attitudes
toward this task were highly negative. They were then paid either $1 or $20 to tell a waiting participant
(relay a confederate) that the tasks were really interesting. Almost all of the participants agreed to walk
into the waiting room and persuade the subject accomplice that the boring experiment would be fun.
Aim

Festinger and Carlsmith (1959) investigated if making people perform a dull task would create cognitive
dissonance through forced compliance behavior.

Method

In their laboratory experiment, they used 71 male students as participants to perform a series of dull
tasks (such as turning pegs in a peg board for an hour).

They were then paid either $1 or $20 to tell a waiting participant (a confederate) that the tasks were
really interesting. Almost all of the participants agreed to walk into the waiting room and persuade the
confederate that the boring experiment would be fun.

Results

When the participants were asked to evaluate the experiment, the participants who were paid only $1
rated the tedious task as more fun and enjoyable than the participants who were paid $20 to lie.

Conclusion

Being paid only $1 is not sufficient incentive for lying and so those who were paid $1 experienced
dissonance. They could only overcome that dissonance by coming to believe that the tasks really were
interesting and enjoyable. Being paid $20 provides a reason for turning pegs and there is therefore no
dissonance.

Decision Making

Life is filled with decisions, and decisions (as a general rule) arouse dissonance.

For example, suppose you had to decide whether to accept a job in an absolutely beautiful area of the
country, or turn down the job so you could be near your friends and family. Either way, you would
experience dissonance. If you took the job you would miss your loved ones; if you turned the job down,
you would pine for the beautiful streams, mountains, and valleys.

Both alternatives have their good points and bad points. The rub is that making a decision cuts off the
possibility that you can enjoy the advantages of the unchosen alternative, yet it assures you that you
must accept the disadvantages of the chosen alternative.

People have several ways to reduce dissonance that is aroused by making a decision (Festinger, 1964).
One thing they can do is to change the behavior. As noted earlier, this is often very difficult, so people
frequently employ a variety of mental maneuvers. A common way to reduce dissonance is to increase
the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and to decrease the attractiveness of the rejected
alternative. This is referred to as "spreading apart the alternatives."
Brehm (1956) was the first to investigate the relationship between dissonance and decision-making.
Female participants were informed they would be helping out in a study funded by several
manufacturers.

Participants were also told that they would receive one of the products at the end of the experiment to
compensate for their time and effort. The women then rated the desirability of eight household products
that ranged in price from $15 to $30. The products included an automatic coffee maker, an electric
sandwich grill, an automatic toaster, and a portable radio.

Participants in the control group were simply given one of the products. Because these participants did
not make a decision, they did not have any dissonance to reduce. Individuals in the low-dissonance
group chose between a desirable product and one rated 3 points lower on an 8-point scale. Participants
in the high-dissonance condition chose between a highly desirable product and one rated just 1 point
lower on the 8-point scale. After reading the reports about the various products, individuals rated the
products again.

Participants in the high-dissonance condition spread apart the alternatives significantly more than did
the participants in the other two conditions. In other words, they were more likely than participants in
the other two conditions to increase the attractiveness of the chosen alternative and to decrease the
attractiveness of the unchosen alternative.

Effort

It also seems to be the case that we value most highly those goals or items which have required
considerable effort to achieve.

This is probably because dissonance would be caused if we spent a great effort to achieve something and
then evaluated it negatively. We could, of course, spend years of effort into achieving something which
turns out to be a load of rubbish and then, in order to avoid the dissonance that produces, try to
convince ourselves that we didn't really spend years of effort, or that the effort was really quite
enjoyable, or that it wasn't really a lot of effort.

In fact, though, it seems we find it easier to persuade ourselves that what we have achieved is
worthwhile and that's what most of us do, evaluating highly something whose achievement has cost us
dear - whether other people think it's much cop or not! This method of reducing dissonance is known as
'effort justification'.

If we put effort into a task which we have chosen to carry out, and the task turns out badly, we
experience dissonance. To reduce this dissonance, we are motivated to try to think that the task turned
out well. A classic dissonance experiment by Aronson and Mills (1959) demonstrates the basic idea.

Aim
To investigate the relationship between dissonance and effort.

Method

Female students volunteered to take part in a discussion on the psychology of sex. In the 'mild
embarrassment' condition, participants read aloud to a male experimenter a list of sex-related words like
'virgin' and 'prostitute'.

In the 'severe embarrassment' condition, they had to read aloud obscene words and a very explicit
sexual passage. In the control condition, they went straight into the main study. In all conditions they
then heard a very boring discussion about sex in lower animals. They were asked to rate how interesting
they had found the discussion, and how interesting they had found the people involved in it.

Results

Participants in the 'severe embarrassment' condition gave the most positive rating.

Conclusion

If a voluntary experience which has cost a lot of effort turns out badly, dissonance is reduced by
redefining the experience as interesting. This justifies the effort made.

Critical Evaluation

There has been a great deal of research into cognitive dissonance, providing some interesting and
sometimes unexpected findings. It is a theory with very broad applications, showing that we aim for a
consistency between attitudes and behaviors, and may not use very rational methods to achieve it. It has
the advantage of being testable by scientific means (i.e. experiments).

However, there is a problem from a scientific point of view, because we cannot physically observe
cognitive dissonance, and therefore we cannot objectively measure it (re: behaviorism). Consequently,
the term cognitive dissonance is somewhat subjective.

There is also some ambiguity (i.e. vagueness) about the term 'dissonance' itself. Is it a perception (as
'cognitive' suggests), or a feeling, or a feeling about a perception? Aronson's Revision of the idea of
dissonance as inconsistency between a person's self-concept and a cognition about their behavior makes
it seem likely that dissonance is really nothing more than guilt.

There are also individual differences in whether or not people act as this theory predicts. Highly anxious
people are more likely to do so. Many people seem able to cope with considerable dissonance and not
experience the tensions the theory predicts.

Finally, many of the studies supporting the theory of cognitive dissonance have low ecological validity.
For example, turning pegs (as in Festinger's experiment) is an artificial task that doesnt happen in
everyday life. Also, the majority of experiments used students as participants, which raise issues of
a biased sample. Could we generalize the results from such experiments?