Perceptual distinctiveness and oddity-problem solving in children

Perceptual

Distinctiveness Solving

5

1111’1\

-OIL,’

(~~llhil?

I,

lW,~l,‘c~l

and

Oddity-Problem

in Children’

72

t1.1:1~’

111 ;,

lill,l,(,-t,onitlOlJ

Utidlt)’

tlNIthl11

11in II cithcr two or follr identical nonodd Amuli. It was hypothesized that8 increasing till) nnmbcr of idcntiwl stimuli in the xrray xould add to lhr tlistinctivenees of the odd cut and t,h~wl~y facilitate solution of ihe oddit,\problem. Kindergarten vllildrvn’s performun~~e in the 5stimuIus condition was superior to their performance in ihc 3-stimulw condition; there was no difference between conditions for either preschool or xcond grade children. The results of thv two cspcriments indicntctl that prwcptual enhancement facilitates the txmcition to conceptual modea of problrm solving, but that the pot.rncy of this variable is dcprwlcnt on t IIv r~hiltl’s tlr~vclopmcntnl lewl

It lxte becu llcld that tllcn wgnitivc clependent

upon

perceptunl

wlienciw

opelxt~iurlr oi young ilr their surroundingti,

cllildrcn ;LIX’ :lnd th:L1: in

the course of clcvelopmcnt thi.5 dependcnw is ~r~duallg superseded 01’ subordinated by n variety of conceptunl *l-stems (Wcrnc~r, 1937; Wohlwill, 1962; Gollin. 1967). The prcwnt espcriment w:xs designed to determine if incrcnsing the lxweptunl snlkncy of thcl odd stimulus in a threeposition oddity problem would fucilitatc nwtcry of the tnsk. It has been :irguccl that disrrqxint stimuli are mor(’ likely to be :!ttcntion :rrousin: tlxw stimuli ltw tliffcrNrti:ttctI from otlwrs iI1 thrs stimulus field (Dembw :I~KI Earl. 3957; Berlync, 1960). The :~llv:~lltn~ct of the discrepant stimulus :LS:I rc~ponw elicitor liw been demoustratc~cl in :I ~turnbcr of invcstig:ttionc with both human :\nd animal S’s (P.R.. Scott. 1964 : IXwcqol? rind Jlenzel. 1960).

,2ddinp

nouorkl

stimuli

to :ul :~Nx>~ 1~s also IKVI

Eo~lcl

to fncili-

tntc cli~wiminntion learnin, r iMcCulloc~h :~ncl Niwc’n, 193i 1 The stn~&rd t,hwe-position oc1dit.p t:k Inwc~lts 8 nil 11 :L horizont:lI :trr:~y of stimuli--t.wo of which arc i(lcnticnl and the rcm:t.illing one diswclwnt. To rolv(~ the odclity probl~~m thcb subject mud IKI IX t,o choosc~ ’ This r~-wwc~h W:I~ cxrricd ollt. untlw Contrwt So. I’H 43 65-1011 betwren tha. I’ublic Health Service. National Institutcls of Child Health and Human I)evelopmcn~ :tnd the Fels Research Institute. Appreciation is expressed to the staff of the YelloM Springs Community Nursery School and to thv staff of the Mills T.:~wn Elemcntar\ School for makinK rhildren :~r:lilnl,lc for the study. 58n

tlic odd stimulus ou any given trial. A particulnr btimuluti value may be odd or nonodd on any particular trial. Tht: subject must learn to respond to a relation, that of difference, between the odd object and others of the set (EIousc, 1964). In the present experiment an attctmpt x~ made to enhnncc the att’ent’ioll-:lrousinglg propcrtirs of the odd stimulus by introducing :~rlclitionxl nonodtl stimulation. Kindergarten age chiltlreu were cmploycd iu Esperimellt, I rincc in t\vo cxrlier studies of oddit’y problem solvin, 0‘ thry wcrc found to bc trnnsitional between preschool childrcll who 11x1 great clifliculty with the I)roblem and grade school children who solved the problem with relative cxse (Lipsitt and Serunian, 1963; Gollin and Shirk, 1966). In Experiment II the analysis was extended to include olller :md younger children.

The s’s ww 52 kindergartcll cllildlcn from Millh I,xn-n Elcmcntary School, Yellow Springs, Ohio; their ages ranged from Rl--76 month?. Thc~ mere 13 S’s in each of the four csperimcntnl group?.

The apparatus was a dark grey metal box. 37 X 20 X 22 iuchce, with nine horizontally aligned cont,iguouF; rear projection glass windows, 296 X 2Q4c; inches. The stimuli, colored discs 23(,; inches in diameter (red. WXI~, and blue), were’ projected onto the middle three or five windows by in-line projectors. There were 18 possible position counterbalanced combinations of three colors: red-r&green, red-green-red, blue-red-red, cstc.; in the fiv+wintlow condition the left- rind righixnd windows always contained the nonotld color. Thus, the odd stimulus always appeared ill out of the micldlc three windo\vs rcxgardlcss of espcrimental condition. If S pressed the odd stimulus a marble was dclivcrecl through a hok centered 3 inches below the stimuh~~ nrrny. The stimuli remained on for ..5 seconds after response. The child was brought to :l room in the Fels mohilc laboratory a1~1 seated before the apparatus. E gave the following instructions. ‘Wow T am going to show you sonic lights in th(tso windowa and I want you to 1ry :mtl gue.~ n-hich light is the col,rccl WC’. Push the light that you think i-, corrc&. A marbl(h will come out hcrc when you puqh the correct light. I’ut: the> mnrblc~ in this cup. Tr,v to IIMIC~~:t marl~l~~(‘omt’ out c~vrt.y timI

588

I :OLLIR‘,

SARAVO,

BSU

SALTEN

Which liglit c/o ).uu think will gi\-c YOU :I IUWbic? J,uoli :lt tllt’lll :111. Push it.” If corrwt, S was told, “That’s good”; if not correct he n-as told. “Wrong that time. Lrt,‘!: try again.! The noncorrection proredurc~ was usrtl tlll~ougllout.

All ss \V(‘l’(’ givwi 72 three-position otl~lit~~ t ri:klh. ‘J’li(* middle thrc~c~ \viirdows mc’rc itlcntical in stimulus :tr~‘:lr~gc~tlc,ntsfor all groups througltout the eslxrimcnt. Group 3333 :~lways W:LSconfroiitc(l with the middht three lighted windows; for Group 5333 during tlic first IX trials the winclaws flanking the middle thrw on the right antI kft c*orit:~iric(l t’hc:nonodtl stimulus; for Group 5533 the flanking conditioii \v:w maintained for th(h first 36 trials; Group 5AJ33 had 18 trials with th(d ~ionodd flanking stimuli ~msent foll~w-cd by an 1%trial block of nine fl:lnkinp :un(l niii(’ IIOIIfiankin~ trials rantlomly intcrniisecl.

The median number of (~L’~oI’:: of cnch group over IS-trial blocks is shown in Fig. 1; the curvc~ of Groups 5333 and 5M33 were combined in Fig. 1 since they were idcnticnl at, all Jioints. It is apparent that the introduction of the flanking stimuli facilitated oddity problem solving over the first two blocks of trials. Since distributions were skewed a11 ] (z) ‘I? -Io\-crnll analysis of variance was carried out on transformed 1.1’-+ 1)‘/2] error scorc’w. Most Ss in all condit.ions ercntually reachttl solmion; those who began with the 5-window condition made fewer mear wrors than Ss who had the 3-window problem throughout; there was :I significant Blocks effect (P = 10.14, crf = 3, 144, p < .OOl) and th(’ Blocks x Conditions effect, (F --_ 3.92, df m=9, 144, p < .OOlj was also significant. There were no reliable differences nt’ any point betwcrlr Groups 5533, 5333, or 5M33 nor bctwcen any of the four groups on the, I:& two blocks of trials. =\n additional analysis of \xri:tnce on th(l transformed error scorw ii1 wnditions 5533 and 3333 at Blocks 1 and 2 was performed in order to test, the overall effect of the 5- w. 3-window condition. Facilitation 01 Jcarning in the 55 condition compared to the 33 condition was shown to lw rc~linblc (F = 9.172, df L=l? 24, p < .Ol), as w:ts the decrease in errorfrom Block 1 to Block 2 (F = 13.54, df =: 1. 24, p < .Ol). The difference, Iict,ween the 5-windon- and 3-window conditions was rclinble both iii two-tailctl. U x.132, II, I ’ -021 :ind 131ock L’ 13lOCli 1 (Pt3aiin-Whitney, I .\‘Iann-Whitney, two-tailed, T’ -= 41.5, p < .05j. .I!: cxpcrted, there was some positive transfer from tl-w 5-window to ttw q

&window problem as c:vidcnced by a, significant difference between cou(litions 5333 vs. 3333 ai Blorli -o (Xlann-\Vllit,ne?:, one-Mtd, U = 50, I-, < .O5). Positive transfer for thescx c~onrlitiorrs did not extend into Block 3, nor dicl a similar aclvant8age obtairr later ill learning for :I comparison of conclitions 5533 and 3333 at nloc*l; 3. To *mllnl:trize. this eslWiment

BLOCKS OF 18 TRIALS

confirmed the expectation that a 5-stimulus array would facilitate solution of the oddity problem and that this facilitation would transfer to the more difficult 3-position problem. As the number of test trials continued more and more SS xrirecl at solution until in the last two blocks the effect. nf pcvqtllal f:rc~ilitJ:ttion werci no longer clctrc+:tblc~.

I)evelopmental

Analysis

Developmental theory (Werner, 1935, 1948; Wohlwill, 1962: Gollin, 1967) suggests the hypothesis that older children should be able to master the 5-window and 3-window oddity t,asks wit811 comparable efficiency since they are more likely than younger children to rely upon roneeptual cognit,iue modes when confronted with problem-solx%g tasks;.

\

.--’ .

3333 5533 P

mcnt I. Becaurc of the highly slww-etl distributions transformed error scores [ (x)l’? + (2: + I)“‘] were use11 in the analysis of variance carrictt out between kindergarten and preschool Ss in the first t1v-o 1%trial blocky. scrond-grnde groups were cscluded from the :mnlpsis bccausc of thcbit, INW-crro~.tcss performances tmhroughout. I
Position

Responding

Prcschoolcrs tended to perseverate a position response to a grcntcxr extent t,han kindcrgarteners; this response tendency appeared to hc cntirety nlwmt in t’he second-grade groups. -4 count, was made of tlic, nuinher of Ss in cacti age group who mnclcl :L run of fiw or more conwcutiw icsponsc~e to a single position clui~i11~ tl7c ‘i2 trixls of the task. Sinw thcw were no diffcrcnces between cqeriment:J conditions the data ncli’e conibincd: the pw cent of Ss in car11 age group from the youngest to olclcsst who made a position run of five or more responses was 58, 8. :cnrt 0, respectively. There was n statistically significant difference in [lumber of Ss who made position runs between preschoolers and kinclel. qartencr:: iy2 -~ 11.13. df 7 1. p c’ 001).

lyne, 1960) t,hen t,he reinforcement of that: rfqonse 011 Trial 1 ~houltl contribute to the con\-crsion of the “goal ” stimulus to :L “means-end” .stimulus (,Dember wcl Earl, 1957) and the “investigatory” reaponsc to a11 “illSt,rulnctltnl” ~eq~onsc (Berlyne, 1960) ; Trial 2 odd responding sl~oul~l st#rengthen tht conrcrsiou. Consistent Iv-it11this intcrprct:ltion is the finding that. Trial 1 odd responders in the 55 rontlition make fewer errors 011 the remaining trials of the t,ask than nonodd rwpoiiders at bot,h preschool :ltltl kiiiclergaitcn age levels (U = 2, p = .038; 7; = 4, p =: .03; twoI:tikd,l, wllilc in the 33 conclition there :trt: no sigiiifiwnt clift‘ewiirc~ I~chwi~ Trial 1 odd :~ntl iiono~ltl req)onders.

At the end of the task, children were asked, “How did you know nhich uxs the correct wiwlow ?!’ The number of Ss in wch group who coul(l T.orb:llizc solution corrcsl~onded to 5, 20, :md 70(? of the prwchool, ltindcr,c:wtcn (all groups of both experiments) nncl xccoiid gr:~lc gi~oups’,Icspect i\-cly. iz multiple x” of frcqucwcies showetl tlicl diffcwnces bctwwii t~llc,~t~ ,qroups to be highly relinblc (x9 = 24.24, df = 2, p < .OOl). The type 01 T-c~rbnlizntions in the three groups xws :llso quite diffcwnt. Most of tll(l kindcrgnrtcn children who ~erbnlized mcntionccl iiumlwr of cuw, or both Ilumbcr and the propcrtp of snmciiers-tlifferencc, while tlic mnjority of ~cY0ntl gr:&rs verl)nlizctl o$!/ in tcrnis of e:~mciic~~-rliffer~~iic~,.The only ~~rw:Chool child who ~crbnlizcd the soh~tioll said, “T~cIY~‘s only one reel one, isn’t tlichrc?“, then sul~scr~uently, “Only one blue oii~,” :ui(l again, “Only one gwc~ii one.” This rliild ~-:Is in tli(b 3533 condition. A typical kindergarten verbalisntion mentioning only number WI’: L’whichew~l. tlwc’s one’ of.” A vrrl~aliz:~tio~i cqrrwin, 0‘ hot11 llllllll,(~l~ of (‘IIW a11d ~alllctrc~~-tlift’c,t,ciic,cxw, “two :\I’(’ the ~aiiio color :~ixl oiic’ isn’t.” h typical ~ccond glnde vcrbahzation cqrcwing only t-h ~onccyt of s:1111(‘11cs>~clifft~rciicc was, ” I tell I)?; the diffelcnt colors. ” The fwqucncy of liintlwslrtcrt rliildren csprc wing only :I in~mbcr concept :IS coinp:~rccl to oiil) :i sune-diffcrcnt relation w:Ls reliably different from scrond gr:ttlcw (Fiahcr test, p = .05). Thus, while thcw wcw no perform:~nce tliifcrmcw het,wecn kindergarten and second-grade groups on the lnet two blocks of trials tllc, differences in rerbnlizntion +uggcst thxt the comp:~r:~blc termin: pcrfor1tlancc~ outcomes of the two groups m:ry rc~flwt diffcwlit rwpo~w(’ 4rntc~cjc~5.

The ndvantage imparted to oddity-problem solving by the addition of nonodd stimuli is demonstrated in Experiment I and is consistent with the hypothesis that the cognit,ive behavior of young children is dependent

~wnditioii or from differences in tlw ltc~rwpti~ul “rlrn~:k~~~l”I)rovic-l(>c-l by th(s luore extensive nonodd ground. The results of the experiments also appear to br conkteul nith House’~ ( 1964) account of oclclit’y performance: the child must first learn to okrvc the “whicle” 01 “carrier” dimension, then YW the oddity rclatioll among the cuw of tllc vchiclc dimension, and finally approach t,hc odd cue. Iii terms of the present findin,, w it would have to hc assumed that very young children attend to and respond to position cues, and attempts to make the carrier dimension more salient arc to no avail. Kindergarten children arc less posit’ional and thus receptive to attempts to inwcaee t h(s I listinctivciirss of the carrier dimension. Also, being leas positional t,hq rcq~ontl mow readily to the reinforcement contingenciv~ of the task, ant1 lwarc~ kwn, allwit siowly, under t,he 3333 condition. Second-gtxck chil(lwti :II’C cwn lcw positional and any nrrangemcut8 or fcnturo which wc~c%tuatcs:I dimension will not Only draw attention but will al+0 clicit :ul instwncntal I’cspoiisc, leading to almost, pcrfwt, oddity clisrrilnirlntior~ 1~ogardlw~ of experimental arrangenicnt~. Iii sum, the ability to nolTc the three-position oddity l~roblcm :tppe:w to 1~ dependent upon shifts in cognitive behavior from operation+ clominntud by pclc~!,tunl-motor tentlencic>s to operations domiunterl 1, c,oilcel)tuel-\-cl~,111 tcnrlcncies. Increasing the dist~inct~iwncss of tlic odd (‘II(Qfacilitntcs problem solving in SS who ilrv transitional lwtwc~c~np(‘rc,c,l~tll:rl-lnotc,I’ :I11d c~oiicc~~~tu:il-\-(~~l~:~l cogilitivcb ~lwrlw.

'I'. I,., \>-I) ,~lF%hK, H. \k’. f!k~uat.ed and non-equafr’d >tmn~h~s sltuadiscrimination learning by clrimpanxers. II. C’ompnrison with limited J. camp. Psychol., 1937, 23, 365-376. SIWIXTERMAN, H. J. Stratrgiw of normal and mentally retardcltl childlen un~lw conditions of lulcxertain outcome. AnLer. .I. nzc~t. De&., 1964, 69, 66-75. Scow, K. G. .I r~ompariion of similarity and oddity. .I. cxp. chilrl P~ychol., 1964. 1, 123-134. \\‘e~ma, \j-. 1. ‘UII, tlrtcrniinants of play ;tncl ~~sl~loration in c~himpan2c~e.s. .I. cov,lJ. ,dqsiol. I?~l/chol., 1956, 49, 84-89. W~wsea, H. l’rocws ant-l Achievement-A basic prohlcm of education :mtl dcwlo~~rrlwt~nl pyhology. Hnrunrd E&c. Rev., 1937, 7, 353-368. \\rm~~~~, H. C’ov~prrwrfir~ pqlrhology of wzentrrl developmcnf. K”;cv Tok, Follet. 194s. Korr~.wrr,r,, J. 1;. From pcrccption to infcrencc, : :I tlkwnsion of wgnil i1.v tbvclol)mcnt. Morco~q~. SW. Rcs. Chil~l Dc~t~elpm.. 1962. 27, No. 2. 87-107. .\lcGrJLLuca:

tions in response.