Learning without the presence of objects

by Heather Craven (Subscribe to Heather Craven's posts) Aug 3rd 2006 4:00PM

Traditional models of learning assume that an association can be formed only between cues that are physically present. In a study in the current issue of Psychological Science, however, investigators reported that when two objects that had never appeared together were simultaneously activated in memory, young human infants associated the representations of those objects. Neither object was physically present at the time the association was formed. The association remained latent for up to 2 weeks, when the infants used it to perform a deferred imitation task. The findings reveal that what infants merely see "brings to mind" what they saw before and combines it in new ways. In addition to challenging a fundamental tenet of classic learning models, these findings have major theoretical and practical implications for early cognitive development. Every day, in the same manner, young infants probably form numerous associations between activated memories of objects that are physically absent, creating a potential knowledge base of untold dimensions.

Cognitive researchers are arriving at many findings that were not ever guessed at a short number of years ago. This study impressed me. How about you?

Source

Comments (1)

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

san 8-03-2006 @ 6:00PM

I think there's a lot of bigotry in child-rearing studies and advice, bigotry we're only now learning about. I read something about a year ago related to a study reinforcing the importance of manipulating three-dimensional objects in space for the brain development of young toddlers. Important to the point of spurning almost all other enrichment activities, especially TV and computers. According to the lead researcher, working with real 3D objects better prepares children for the sorts of things they'll have to do later in life. To this I ask, Do what things later in life? As usual, most of what we do *now* developmentally for our children pertains to what *we* have to do *now* as adults. New technology creates new roles for humans, and it's difficult to say what in childhood will best prepare people for these new roles. Obviously people who spend a lot of time studying these things can promote suggestions and make educated guesses. But I think there is inherent bigotry in painting all "high-tech" or contemporary media enrichment with the same brush. Just as there would be the other way round, believing computers are the perfect educational tool.

I mean, long time ago the printing press was considered a frightening, potentially evil device.