Becoming a proficient symbol user is a universal developmental task in the first years of life, but detecting and mentally representing symbolic relations can be quite challenging for young children To test the extent to which symbolic reasoning per se is problematic, we compared the performance of 2 1/2-year-olds in symbolic and nonsymbolic versions of a search task. The children had to use their knowledge of the location of a toy hidden in a room to draw an inference about where to find a miniature toy in a scale model of the room (and vice versa) Children in the nonsymbolic condition believed a shrinking machine had caused the room to become the model They were much more successful than children in the symbolic condition, for whom the model served as a symbol of the room The results provide strong support for the role of dual representation in symbol understanding and use.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BladesM.SpencerC., (1994). The development of children's ability to use spatial representation. InReeseH. (Ed.)Advances in child development and behavior (Vol. 25.pp.157–190. New YorkAcademic Press.
BruckM.CeciS.J.FraneoeurE.RenickA. (1995). Anatomically datailed dolls do not facilitate preschoolers' reports of a pediatric examination involving genitial touching. Journal of Experimental Psychology Applied, 1, 95–109.
4.
DeLoacheJ.S. (1987). Rapid change in the symbolic functioning of very young childrenScience, 238, 1556–1557.
5.
DeLoacheJ.S. (1989). Young children's understanding of the correspondence between a scale model and a larger space. Cognitive Development, 4, 121–139.
6.
DeLoacheJ.S. (1991). Symbolic functioning in very young children: Understanding of pictures and models. Child Development, 62, 736–752.
7.
DeLoacheJ.S. (1995a). Early symbolic understanding and use. InMedirD., (Ed.)The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 33, pp.65–114). New YorkAcadmic Press.
8.
DeLoacheJ.S. (1995b). Early understanding and use of symbols. Current Directions in Psychological Sceince, 4, 109–113.
9.
DeLoacheJ.S.AndersonK.SmithC.M. (1995, April) Interviewing children about real-life events. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Societs for Research in Child Development. Indianapolis, IN.
10.
DeLoacheJ.S.KolstadD.V.AndersonK.N. (1991). Physical similarity and young children's understanding of scale models. Child Development, 62, 111–126.
11.
DeLoacheJ.S.MarzolfD.P. (1995). The use of dolls to interview young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 69, 155–173.
12.
DowG.APickH L (1992) Young children's use of models and photographs as spatial representationsCognitive Developments, 7, 351–363.
13.
GibsonJ.J. (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston Houghton Mifflin.
14.
GoodmanG.S.AmanC. (1990) Children's use of anatomically detailed dolls to recount an event. Child Development, 61, 1859–1871.
15.
GordonB.N.OrnsteinP.A.NidaR.E.FollmerACrenshawM.C.AlbertG. (1993) Does the use of dolls facilitate children's memory of visits to die doctor?Applied Cognitive Psychology, 7, 459–474.
16.
GregoryR.L. (1970) The intelligent eyeNew YorkMcGraw-Hill.
17.
HenmerL.SplkeE. (1994) A geometric process for spatial reonentation in young childrenNature, 370, 57–69.
18.
LangerS.K. (1942) Philosophy in a new keyCambridge, MAHarvard University Press.
19.
LibenL.L.DownsR.M. (1992) Developing an understanding of graphic representations in children and adults The case of GEO-GraphicsCognitive Development, 7, 331–349.
20.
LillardA.S. (1993). Pretend play skills and the child's theory of mindChild Development, 64, 348–371.
21.
MarzolfD.P. (1994, April). Representing and mapping relations in a symbolic task. Paper presented at the International Conference on Infant Studies Pins.
22.
MarzolfD.PDeLoacheJ.S. (1994). Transfer in young children's understanding of spatial representationsChild Development, 64, 1–15.
23.
PernerJ. (1991) Understanding the representational mindCambridge, MABradford Books/MIT Press.
24.
PotterM.C. (1979). Mundane symbolism The relations among objects names, and ideasInSmithN.R.FranklinM.B., (Eds)Symbolic functioning in childhood (pp41–65) Hillsdale, NJEribaum.
25.
UttalD.H.SchreiberJ.C.DeLoacheJ.S. (1995). Waiting to use a symbol The effects of delay on children's use of modelsChild Development, 66, 1875–1891.
26.
UttalD.H.ScudderK.V.DeLoacheJ.S. (1997). Mabipulatives as symbols A new perspective on the use of concrete objects to teach mathematicsJournal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 18, 37–54.
