psych 105 quiz 4

executive function

ability to organize a sequence of actions towards a goal

learning how things work

-according to piaget, children begin to understand objects in terms of their perceptual properties (esp in sensorimotor stage) -focus on observable/concrete/external characteristics, not causal power -- argued that young children see and learn associations in time/space, but they do not yet conceive of causal relationships -- BUT children famously get very curious about "why" things happen, around 2-3 years old ex: callanan & oakes, 1992: ask why questions -- to what extent can they understand how/why? how do they learn?

executive function & theory of mind

-across difference tasks/cultures, both EF and ToM improve dramatically betw. 3-5 years -greater EF performance for chinese preschoolers wasn't associated with greater ToM performance, individual differences in EF correlated with ToM performance within each sample -- diff between china / us only in EF, not in ToM -children perform better in ToM tasks when EF demands are lower - increase complexity of FB (adding 3rd location( leads to poorer performance -performance on FB tasks improves if object hidden in far-away location, which may make it easier to inhibit saying the true location -early differences in EF predict late ToM performance, but not the other way around

gopnik & graf, 1988

-children learn about the causal relationship between world/mind between 3-5 years -- 5 year olds are able to identify and remember sources of knowledge, while 3 year olds struggle -do children keep track of their history of past beliefs? when do they identify sources? will they store source into memory? associated psychological state? -goal: not only if young children can ID source of beliefs, but also if those that do can remember sources at a slightly later time -forced-choice source questions, 3 options (look inside/told explicitly/given clue), if correct, asked to choose for source attribution, some children received training, then delayed-object location test -3 year olds have difficulty identifying the source of their beliefs even with training, -- difficulty with understanding how beliefs/representations of world are causally related through perceptual/inferential processes -- emerges from 3-5 -wrote summary of this so consult if necessary

bilingualism

-experience with multiple languages may train executive function e.g. choosing the appropriate language for any given situation -bilingual children perform better on the DCCS (5 years old in study), indicating a greater cognitive flexibility -- switching ability, similar results found in 7mo infants -may delay dementia onset in old age -some studies have failed to show a link to executive function, effect may only be present when cognitive demands are high (i.e. for more difficult tasks); other studies show effects for some executive functions (managing attentional conflicts) but not others (controlling impulses)

fNIRS

-functional near infrared spectroscopy -detects changes in blood oxygenation using near-infrared light -doesn't require staying in a confined space, more robust to motion than fMRI/EEG -BETTER temporal resolution than fMRI, BETTER spatial resolution than EEG -gaining popularity among neurodevelopmental researchers ex: moriguchi & hiraki, 2009: used fNIRS to study the neural correlates (brain activation patterns) associated with children's set shifting on the DCCS -5 year olds show PFC activation during DCCS similar to adults, some 3 year olds successful at DCCS and showed similar pattern of activation -PFC development associated with DCCS performance, EF, 3-5 year period again!

understanding of own mental states

-improve around 3-5 years, including previous mental states -- can be complex questions that require EF -can report on own past beliefs (gopnik & slaughter, 1991): e.g. "what did you think was in the crayon box at first?" -- 3 year olds will say they always knew it was candles, but older will admit first judgement of crayons

PFC & executive function

-other cognitive/motor abilities needed to make use of ToM in real worlds -- similar to motor abilities necessary to behaviorally demonstrate object permanence -major development of PFC during 3-5 years, associated with development of EF

learning words

-parental reports show that young children's word comprehension develops faster than their word production, notice a vocab increase around 9-15 months, might understand even more -tincoff & jusczyk, 1999: preferential looking task, babies shown videos of mom/dad, with audio saying either "daddy" or "mommy" -- does it increase their viewing of the appropriate video? -around 8% increase above baseline when parent is named, preferential looking as noisy measure anyway (wouldn't expect 100% increase), many reasons why babies would be looking at both videos -is this evidence that 6month olds understand words? to some extent? does this mean that parents are understanding how many words their kids know -null hypothesis would be that there was no effect of saying a parent's name on the proportion of time a baby looks at the named parent, p<0.05 would mena that if the null hypothesis was true, there would be a less than 5% chance that we would've seen a difference as big as the one observed -d=0.34 -- small,, but small effect is in this case enough to support hypothesis -- if they look reliably at the video that matches the word, even a little bit -- demonstrates understanding, that they have some understanding of word -significance only found in first half of test session, analysis of which was not intended, did not predict that first-looks correct should be more common in the first half of the test session and don't explain why that statistic was found -other studies do support claim that 6 month olds do have some understanding of words (conceptual replication) -- can distinguish hand/feet, several common nouns like apple/bottle, better at distinguishing unrelated words compared to related words

false belief test

-performance improves from 3-5 years across cultures, despite cultural & linguistic differences -- studies in canada/samoa/peru/india/china/north america back up

parental behaviors & language learning

-tamis-lemonda et al., 2001: videotaped mother & child playing for 10 minutes at 9 and 13 months, then tracked child's language learning milestones -types of maternal responsiveness coded: affirmations of actions/imitations of a child's vocalization/description of object or event or activity/ questions about object event or activity/play prompts or demonstrations / exploratory prompts -children whose mothers were more responsive during lay sessions at both ages achieved language milestones earlier (at 24 months) e.g. 50 words in expressive vocabulary -riding in a backpack (versus a stroller) associated with more parent speech, infant-initiated speech, and visual scanning by infants -didn't directly measure linguistic competence, but these kins of interactions with the environment/one's parents have been linked with language development -strollers may limit learning opportunities but generally preferred by parents

bradley & bryant, 1983

65 of participants with low sound categorization scores (2 SD below mean) were selected for a longitudinal training study -experimental groups 1/2 got intensive training in SC (40 sessions over 2 years), taught that words shared sounds at beginning/middle/end with pictures of objects -group 2 also taught that sounds were represented by letters of the alphabet -groups 3/4 were controls, not given phonological awareness training but still given some kind of training (active control group) -1 and 2 performed better than control on reading/spelling (not math/memory) two years later -- 2 performed best of all -first evidence of causal link between phonological awareness and reading skills ---> language play e.g. nursery rhymes encouraged in early school -also supported phonological deficit theory of developmental dyslexia -- research has confirmed this relationship in clinical/nonclinical settings

perception-action cycle

PFC enables, integrating complex sensory input to produce novel/complex behaviors

set-shifting

ability to dynamically adjust mental set as situation changes -- commonly assessed with WCST/DCCS -commonly impaired by PFC lesions that disrupt ability to judge context/inhibit behaviors (vmpfc) or disrupt working memory (lateral pfc) -false belief task? about the perspectives (one's own or someone else's) that have conflicting perspectives, must make judgment from other person's despite conflict from their own, performance associated with DCCS test, stroop test of inhibitory control

neurogenesis

adult brain still capable of producing new neurons through exercise/learning/after brain damage (will take over function of damaged areas) -babies as born with same # of neurons as an adult (100-200b), led neurologists to believe that adult brain did not grow new neurons

overregularization

apply language rules where they don't belong -by 2 years old, children typically know many words, including both regular/irregular forms of nouns/verbs -- learning words individually, but don't yet understand logic of rules -3-5 years: children will overregularize irregular nouns/verbs by applying rules for the regular forms, often occurs after saying irregular forms for months (like sang/went/heard) -errors occur shortly after children begin to mark tense in regular verbs, taken as a sign of the reorganization of child's mind -- extract pattern and apply to all, V-shaped curve where they start making it more before overcoming it, shift from memorizing individual words to generating words based on rules -equilibrium between two--use rules in most cases, but using irregular forms when appropriate -errors are relatively rare (<10%), and they may be less likely for words used frequently by parents, but often persist even after corrections

grammatical rules

combining sounds into words (morphology) and words into sentences (syntax) allow us to convey infinite meanings using novel words/sentences -chomsky has restricted his human-specific LAD to include only the ability to apply rules an arbitrary number of times -- extent to which language is human-specific is debated

wisconsin card sorting test

common measure of executive function (e.g. cognitive flexibility, set-shifting, inhibition), that requires sorting cards based on changing rules e.g. first sort by color, then sort by shape

functional connectivity

correlations in the activity of multiple brain regions -HC connectivity with cortical regions increases in childhood, includes PFC and specifically interior frontal gyrus ex: geng et al., 2021: used fMRI to assess -greater HC-PFC FC associated with better source memory performance from 4-7 years -behavioral experience & brain development are interactive + bidirectional processes, experience shaping future changes in brain & brain shapes future changes in behavior

gopnik, 2009

counterfactuals: possible worlds of how past could have gone or how future could be -children as able to consider possibilities, distinguish from reality -- science of imagination + causal map of the world that allows exploration -CF thinking as allowing planning/change/future, accompanied by guilt about past & disappointment -anticipating future possibilities in as young as 18mo (taped ring + rake experiment) -- can solve problems insightfully, 3yo as able to imagine + reason about an alternative past, pretending as present CF thinking in 18mo -aware that they are pretending and accompanied by signs (giggling) -- as more moved by both, larger/difficult to control emotions -2/3yo as producing + asking for causal explanations -- causation as giving logic to fantasy + pretend play (piaget -- pretend play as evidence of inability to distinguish between reality + fantasy) -might fail to think counterfactually because they don't have the right causal knowledge, not because they are incapable of imagining the possibilities -casual map/theories/blueprints -blicket machine & CF predictions -- can draw conclusions, schulz experiment + talking to machine as turning it on, new causal knowledge as changing way kids thought about possibilities

fMRI

detects change in blood oxygenation using strong magnetic field -HIGH spatial resolution (detailed map of whole brain) but LOW temporal resolution (can't see fast changes) -requires staying still in confined space for the duration of the task

EEG

detects changes in electromagnetic fields, LOW spatial resolution (bad at localizing areas) but HIGH temporal resolution (detects fast changes) -compare brain activity in 2 states -more robust to motion than fMRI ex: liu et al., 2008: used EEG to study brain activity during false belief test -"reality" questions: where is the object really? versus "think" questions: where does garfield think the object is? -adults show increased PFC activity for reality vs think question (more important in EEG that there is a difference as opposed to direction) - thought to reflect EF processes involved in judging other's minds -4-6yo children who pass this test show this same pattern, those who fail test do not show this PFC activation (no difference)

implicit theory of mind

ex: baillargeon & onishi, 2005 -15 month old infants -- predict an actor's behavior on the basis on T/F belief about a toy's hiding place? -target starts in green box -- conditions: TB green, TB yellow (moves to yellow), FB green (experimenter can't see it move from green to yellow), FB yellow (experimenter sees green to yellow but doesn't see yellow to green) -would expect to look at correct in TB -- are kids going to be surprised when experimenter looks in the box? -- looked longer when actor looks at correct box in false belief conditions, suggesting that they understand the actor's belief and are expecting them to be deceived (surprised because they know the actors shouldn't know) -evidence for early/implicit theory of mind inconsistent -- chance-level performance in 2 year olds but not 18 month olds -earliest origins of ToM are a matter of debate, much like other abilities (object permanence, understanding words) -- can real world behaviors be more definitive examples?

real-world deception

ex: peskin & andino, 2003: most 3 year olds (83%) failed to keep hiding place a secret from the seeker, tell seeker where they're hiding, hiding before the seeker closed their eyes, failing to remain hidden/quiet, don't understand seeing=knowing principle/ToM -hide & seek as having high ecological validity -most 4 year olds (74%) and 5 year olds (94%) played successfully -related: only 1/3 of 3 year olds could keep a secret, 2/3 of 4yo and 89% of 5yo -- shown a cake for vicky's birthday and told to keep it a secret, then vicky asks if there is anything to eat in the kitchen -- do they tell her?

myelin

fatty insulating layer around axons, allowing action potentials to travel faster, most common on long-range projections -myleination of frontal lobe occurs from 6-8 months (seen in deon et al., 2011: structural MRI technique designed to detect myelin)

exploratory research

have data/didn't make an explicit prediction -- perfectly good way to find unexpected patterns in the data, as long as you report it as this and not confirmatory

childhood amnesia

inability of adults to recall early episodic memories -- average first memory age reported by adults 3-5 years -not that no memories are getting recorded (will remember age 2 at age 4), -neuroimaging work in memory in children under 8 rare -- subcortical and different to image, too deep for EEG/fNIRS -PFC/HC important for memory coding + retrieval, develop in early childhood

p-hacking

manipulating data analysis to achieve significant results -- incentivized by journals that will not publish null results or replication studies ex: in t&J, significance only in first half of the test session, which wasn't the intended level of analysis)

effect size

measures magnitude of observed effect ex: cohen's d for comparing two group means -- how many standard deviations apart the two means are -- how big is the difference, compared to normal/expected variation d=0.2 is small, 0.5 is medium, 0.8 is large

source monitoring

memory for source information also improves -ability associated with resistance to misleading suggestion (giles et al., 2002): asking children source of their knowledge (seen or told), made children less likely to fall for misleading suggestion -gopnik: foundation of childhood as evolutionary division of labor, R&D department of human species and adults as production -distinct capacity for change, imagination/learning -would make sense to discard past beliefs in order to update as quick as possible, esp. how babies and children are constantly updating, multiple paradigm shifts per year, adults as having supported/still worldviews and will be more reluctant to change them, only with more robust & reliable evidence, and therefore have more intact source monitoring

blocking rule

memory of irregular forms blocks application of general rule, thing that stops you applying general rule where it doesn't belong

precausality

piaget argued that by 3-4yo, idea of physical causality involves psychological explanations, explaining things in terms of an agents motivation or intentions - related to the idea of animism (objects are endowed with life/will/consciousness) -no distinction between physical & psychological, view as extension of self and therefore alive -piaget 1929: children commonly report that the sun/moon follow them when they walk outside -"spontaneous animism": children typically believe the ability to move is associated with life (fly yes, bicycle no because we make it move, cloud yes) -- does the sun have motivation? wants to hear what we're saying -around 7-12 years old, children learn that sun/moon aren't really following them, must reconcile information with existing schemas of sun/moon through accommodation -way in which child frames questions shows that physical causality is for him still undifferentiated from psychological/purposive associations -ask animistic question of who made sun/stars twinkle -argued that they are in this state until at least age 6 - focusing on psychological (animistic/artificialistic) causes -- but do they really dominate as much as he claimed?

mental set

preparing neural resources appropriate to situation (set of rules)

synaptic pruning

process whereby many synapses are destroyed, leaving only the most efficient and frequently used synapses -- major occurrences in early / middle childhood -layer III neurons show a lot of synaptogenesis and then pruning in infancy -directed by experience -- brain produces more synapses than it will use, neurons compete in a darwinian process that retains only the most useful connections (neural darwinism/experiential selection) e.g. if fingers are used more, brain maps representing fingers will grow -- amounts to neural sculpting via experience -neural pathways that are used get strengthened, pathways that aren't used will die off

synaptogenesis

production of new synapses through the growth of axons & dendrites, proceeds rapidly during first year (preSN axon to postSN dendrite) -maximum number of synapses achieved around 1-2

perseveration

repeating same response when shifting is called for

file drawer problem

researchers run multiple studies & only publish when p<.05, "file away" findings that don't reach significance, and thus give a false impression of the strength of the evidence

data fishing

running a bunch of tests (that you didn't plan beforehand) looking for a significant result -- undermines logic of hypothesis testing & p-value -predictions need to be made before exploring data, because 1/20 significant by chance -should know how many/which analyses were conducted, which/how were selected for reporting -- now common to preregister analyses

dimensional change card sort

simplified card game that is used to measure executive function in children, first learn a rule, then inhibit that one and switch to a new one

executive functions

specific abilities e.g. working memory, inhibition, set-shifting

hickling & wellman, 2001

studied verbal explanations that four children gave from ages 2.5-5 years using CHILDES (database of scripts) -identified utterances with words like why/because/so/how/if/then -types of causes: psychological/social-conventional/physical/biological -children as young as 2 years old offer causal explanations, offered many psychological explanations, also invoked biological + physical -- especially physical causes with objects as subject matter -shows that young children are not limited to precausal explanation

perspective-taking

task in 4-6 year old children, monolingual vs bilingual vs only some exposure to another language -director can't see distractor items (smallest car) -- child has to consider what director understands/sees in order to follow command of director: "i see a small car" -- will they pick small car that director can see or smallest car that director can't see? -measured behavioral outcome but also first looks -both bilingual children and children with more limited exposure to people speaking another language outperformed monolingual children in both behavioral and eye-tracking measures - tracking people's mental states in diverse environments, even if not speaking language itself, may train perspective-taking abilities -better performance/less likely to look first at distractor -- NOT related to DCCS scores, suggesting that these effects are separate from the effects of bilingualism on executive function

artificialism

tendency to believe that everything must have been created by a conscious being -- no separate notion of physical causality -genera as principles of organization of life

confirmatory research

tests specific predictions -- "gold standard" if you want to test a hypothesis/theory, but scientific discoveries are often unexpected!

delayed response task

very similar to A not B task except order of A & B trials is randomly varied and not trained on A first, delay between hiding object & letting subject find it -increasing this delay increases the task difficulty and produces A not B error -classic test of PFC function -- performance in nonhuman primates associated with virtually every technique in existence, performance in adults severely impaired by PFC damage -increase in performance from 7.5-12 months, delay needed produce A not B error increases with age -developmental progression of performance on A not B task requires same cognitive abilities, performance as index of maturation of FC function -boost from 7.5 to 12mo coincides with period of maximum dendritic growth in PFC -layer III neurons in PFC project to other cortical areas (cortico-cortical projections) for complex processing required for EF

child-as-externalist

view/idea that children think about objects in terms of their external/observable/perceptual properties, often associated with piaget & sensorimotor stage -- have trouble reasoning about things they cannot see -but by 3yo, children have some understanding about the insides of objects -- which aren't externally visible, but important for understanding how objects work, will report that animals have blood/bones/organs, while inanimate objects have cotton/paper/hard stuff inside (gelman, 1987) ex: gelman & wellman, 1991: if children are externalists, they will rely too much on external appearances, making mostly phenomenalism errors (say objects that look the same also have the same insides) -if children rely too much on non-external characteristics like category membership, they will make realism errors (saying objects that have same insides look alike) -children performed above chance level at both ages, made both phenomenalistic and realistic errors -- not biased towards focusing on external appearances (should have been all phenomenalistic if really externalists) -- shows that children have some capacity to look beneath surface appearances!

statistical significance

what are the chances we would've gotten this result if our hypothesis was wrong? if p-value is traditionally low (p<0.05), we reject the null hypothesis -- not about how big the effect is, but the difference -rejecting the null hypothesis doesn't prove the hypothesis true, but provides some evidence for it, smaller p-value --> stronger evidence against null hypothesis -researchers increasingly skeptical of p-values very close to 0.05, now common to report exact p-values -high # of barely significant studies in literature