Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
10 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
Aim of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
|
See whether depth perception was innate or learnt. If infants of various species avoided a visual drop.
|
|
|
Historical context of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Nature-Nurture Debate |
Nature-nurture debate (behaviour learnt on innate). As part of this our visual ability has been considered. Nativists see visual ability as being innate, and empiricists see it as being through experience.
|
|
|
Academic context of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Lashley & Russell (1934) |
Lashley and Russell (1934) reared neonate rats in the dark and found that they could still jump the correct distance for food. Suggesting that visual ability is innate.
|
|
|
Procedure of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Participants Visual Cliff |
36 babies (could crawl) & their mothers, along with 29 neonate animals; rats, kids, lambs and chicks.
Created 'visual cliff' = box of b&w checkers. 'Shallow' and 'cliff' side & sheet of glass to cover. Babies placed in middle and mother called them from both sides (willingness to crawl recorded). Other species placed in middle and observed. Separate condition was set up = background changed to plain grey to see if it gave clues to depth. |
|
|
Findings of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Human babies Other species |
27 babies moved from middle, 27 crawled to shallow side, only 3 crawled to cliff.
Other species = none moved to cliff & all moved to shallow. When placed on the cliff side they froze. When pattern changed to grey animals showed no preference for either side. |
|
|
Conclusions of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
|
Concluded all species showed intact depth perception by the time they could move independently. Also, depth perception is innate, therefore supporting the nativists view.
Concluded using pattern to judge depth was innate. |
|
|
Evaluation of methodology of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Strengths. |
Laboratory experiment = can be heavily controlled. Suggests we can be sure IV is a result of DV.
Same equipment can be used for both human and non-human babies. Suggests that the findings are credible. |
|
|
Evaluation of methodology of Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Weaknesses. |
Ethical issues = pps unable to give informed consent. Also, some were distressed. E,g. babies crying and animals 'freezing' on spot.
Study involved interpreting behaviour = could not explain reasoning or motivation for action. We also do not know for certain why majority avoided cliff side. |
|
|
Critically assess Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Supporting evidence. Lashley and Russell (1934) Sinai, Ooi & He (1998) |
Lashley and Russell (1934) reared neonate rats in the dark and found that they could still jump the correct distance for food. Suggesting that visual ability is innate.
Sinai, Ooi & He (1998) who found pps could use texture to judge distance and when interrupted, e,g. by a ditch, pps were less accurate. |
|
|
Critically assess Gibson and Walk's study. (1960)
Evidence against. Pei, Pettet & Norica (2007) |
Pei, Pettet & Norica (2007) who found babies could use crude patterns like checked squares but could not use more subtle differences like adults. Suggests whilst some visual perception is innate, others are learnt through experience.
|
