A ‘SUMMING UP’ OF PIAGET’S WORK IN CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
Jean Piaget (1896-1980) was a Swiss developmental psychologist known for his epistemological studies with children. His theory of cognitive development and epistemological views are known as "genetic epistemology." Bärbel Inhelder (1913-1997) was also a Swiss psychologist, known for her work with Piaget.
They wrote in the Preface of this 1966 book, “In this volume we have tried to present, as briefly and as clearly as possible, a synthesis, or summing up, of our work in child psychology. A book such as this seemed to us particularly desirable since our published studies have been spread out over a number of volumes, some of them quite lengthy and some of them fairly difficult to read. This little book, of course, is not meant to be a substitute for reading the other volumes. But it represents, we believe, a useful introduction to the questions we have studied and will enable the reader to gain an adequate understanding of what we have learned in our investigations.”
They add in the Introduction, “[This book] deals with mental growth or, what amounts to the same thing, the development of behavior patterns (including consciousness) up to adolescence, the transitional phase marking the entrance of the individual into adult society. Mental growth is inseparable from physical growth… in order to understand mental growth it is not enough to start with birth; there is an embryology of reflexes… dealing with the movements and responses of the fetus, and the preperceptive behavior of the fetus, for instance, is relevant to the study of the perception of tactilo-kinesthetic causality. From a theoretical point of view, it also implies that child psychology must be regarded as the study of one aspect of embryogenesis… of organic as well as mental growth, up to the beginning of the state of relative equilibrium which is the adult level.” (Pg. vii)
They continue, “one might be tempted to consider the expressions ‘child psychology’ and ‘genetic psychology’ to be synonymous. But there is an important distinction between them: whereas child psychology deals with the child for his own sake and does not consider his eventual development into an adult, we tend today to use the term ‘genetic psychology’ [for] the study of the developmental processes that underlie the functions studies in general psychology (intelligence, perceptions, etc.). Genetic psychology tries to explain mental function by their mode of formation; that is, by their development in the child…. The genetic method has become important in all branches of psychology (consider, for example, the major role attributed to childhood by psychoanalysis) and thus gives child psychology a key position in many diverse fields of psychology… interest in psychological investigations of the child is increased when we realize that the child explains the man as well as and often better than the man explains the child.” (Pg. viii-ix)
They state in Chapter 1, “There certainly is such a thing as a sensori-motor intelligence, but it is very difficult to specify the exact moment when it appears. Actually, the question makes no sense, for the answer always depends on an arbitrary choice of criterion. What one actually finds is a remarkably smooth succession of stages, each marking a new advance, until the moment when the acquired behavior presents characteristics that one or another psychologist recognizes as those of ‘intelligence.’ … There is a continuous progression from spontaneous movements and reflexes to acquired habits and from the latter to intelligence. The real problem is not to locate the first appearance of intelligence but rather to understand the mechanism of this progression.” (Pg. 4-5)
The explain, “As regards the development of the cognitive functions in the child… the sensori-motor structures constitute the source of the later operations of thought. This means that intelligence proceeds from action as a whole, in that it transforms objects and reality, and that knowledge, whose formation can be traced in the child, is essentially an active and operatory assimilation.” (Pg. 28)
Later, they observe, “These advantages of representative thought over the sensori-motor scheme are in reality due to the semiotic function as a whole. The semiotic function detaches thought from action and is the source of representation. Language plays a particularly important role in this formative process. Unlike images and other semiotic instruments, which are created by the individual as the need arises, language has already been elaborated socially and contains a notation for an entire system of cognitive instruments (relationships, classifications, etc.) for use in the use in the service of thought. The individual learns this system and then proceeds to enrich it.” (Pg. 86-87)
They explain, “The construction of whole numbers occurs in the child in close connection with the construction of seriations and class inclusions… Naturally, there can be no question of operatory numbers before the existence of a conservation of numerical groups independent of spatial arrangement. Having said this, one might assume, according to set theory and as the logicians Frege, Whitehead and Russell hold, that number proceeds from a term-to-term correspondence between two classes or two sets; that is, two sets have the same number if their members can be put in one-to-one correspondence. But there are two forms of correspondences: the qualified correspondences based on the resemblances of elements (for example, a nose for a nose… as in the correspondence between a model and its copy), and the random or ‘one-to-one’ correspondences. It is the random correspondences that lead to number, for they already imply numerical unity. Number must still be explained genetically, however; otherwise a vicious circle results.” (Pg. 104-105)
They suggest, “It is highly probable, then, that the social exchanges characteristic of the preoperatory level are precooperative; that is, at once social from the point of view of the subject and centered upon the child and his own activity from the point of view of the observer.” (Pg. 118)
They note, “Each new mental structure , by integrating the preceding ones, succeeds both in partly liberating the individual from his past and in inaugurating new activities which at the formal operatory level are mainly oriented toward the future.” (Pg, 150)
This book will be of keen interest to those studying Piaget.