Graphics Reference
In-Depth Information
According to the accepted criteria for a stage
model, there is a hierarchical nature of changes;
therefore fulfilling the requirements of the earlier
stage is necessary but not sufficient for acquiring
the new stage. Thus, all subjects who are successful
in problem finding should also be characterized
as formal operational thinkers, but not all subjects
being in the problem-solving stage should also be
in the problem-finding stage (Arlin, 1984). Arlin
and Getzels tested separately problem solving abil-
ity (formal operations), the three Piagetian stages,
and problem finding ability. The expectation was
that high problem solvers would ask questions that
structurally required combinatorial and systematic
operations. Johnson (1987) suggested a cognitive-
structural framework for developmental studies
of adult inventiveness due to some limitations
imposed by the genetic epistemological paradigm.
He examined hypothesized post-formal thought
structures and their relevance to the understanding
of adult creativity, and in accordance with the Ar-
lin's (1974, 1984) hypothesis about the fifth stage
of the cognitive development postulated that the
problem-finding stage of cognitive development
was a critical component in the creative problem.
Before they develop symbolic thinking, chil-
dren learn to recognize objects, pictures of objects,
and their meaning. They learn to understand
what pictures really mean and how they differ
from the things depicted - the referents. Joy and
excitement experienced by an eight-month old
baby when spotting a picture of the familiar face
is a well known in a field of developmental psy-
chology example of such recognition. At first, a
baby perceives without any emotion two circles
that later on will stand for eyes. Then, the circles
gain the meaning of the eyes, when the baby rec-
ognizes a semicircle put below these circles as a
smiling mouth. According to Judy S. DeLoache
(2005), nine-month old babies see the pictures as
real objects; they try to reach and pick a depicted
apple, and rub or scratch the paper. The confusion
seems to be conceptual, not perceptual, because
when the infants have a choice between a picture
and a real object, they choose the real thing. By
18 months, infants know that a picture stands for a
real thing. They point pictures and name an object
or ask for its name. But two and a half year old
children still mistake photographed objects for
the real thing. For example, they try to put their
foot into a photographed shoe. Three-year-olds
can find a toy in a real room when they see a
miniature toy in a little model of this room, while
two-and-a half-year-olds cannot do this because
they do not grasp a relation between the model and
the room. When they are told (and believe) that a
magical machine has shrunk the room, they have
no problems in finding toys in same places as they
have seen them before shrinking. But until they
are four they do not fully understand pictures, for
example, think that turning a picture of a bowl of
popcorn upside down will result in the depicted
popcorn falling out the bowl. They also make
the scale errors, the Gulliver's errors; they treat
small toys as if they were much larger and try to
get into a miniature car (DeLoache, 2005). Ac-
cording to DeLoache, very young children might
not be able to relate their own body to a doll; for
example, they cannot place a sticker on a doll in
VISUAL DEVELOPMENT
It is generally accepted that developing the visual
thinking starts with learning the symbolic thinking,
which is not intuitive. We have to gain an ability
to understand pictures as symbolic objects; that
means, to become aware that one object can stand
for another. To grasp the meaning of a symbol,
we must achieve dual representation. All symbolic
objects have dual meaning. We think symbolically
when we can see an object both as itself and as
depicting something else. Thus, we must mentally
represent the object and the relation between the
object and what it stands for. Then we may create
and manipulate various symbolic representations
to making knowledge and culture, even using
abstract concepts without direct experience.
