This section of the course aims to provide students with critical, in-depth treatments of selected topics in the cognitive development of infants and young children with a view to illustrating contrasting theoretical positions and demonstrating the continuity between cognitive and social development. The course will use psychological characteristics of autistic spectrum disorders to as a framework within which to discuss important aspects of cognitive developmental theory.

Please remember to bring this booklet to all lectures. Frequent reference will be made to works cited here, and a great deal of time will be saved by my not having to spell out references in detail during the lectures.

If you are having problems finding references, please see me. It is usually possible to let you have copies of whatever you need.

There is no one specific text for this course. However, I recommend that everyone buy

                    Baron-Cohen, S. (1995). Mindblindness. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press. Recommended (c)

Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg, H. & Cohen, D. (2000). Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Cognitive Neuroscience. 2^nd Edition. Oxford. Oxford University Press. Please note this is the 2^nd edition. Some of the readings mentioned below are from the first edn. (1995). Recommended (c)

Boucher, J. (1989). The theory of mind hypothesis of autism: Explanation, evidence and assessment. British Journal of Disorders of Communication, 24, 181-198. Recommended

Bowler, D.M. (1992). "Theory of Mind" in Asperger's syndrome. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 33, 877-893. Essential

Bowler, D.M. Review of S. Baron-Cohen (1995) Mindblindness. European Journal of Disorders of Communication, 31, 210-213. Essential

Bowler, D.M. (2001) Autism: Specific Cognitive Deficit or Emergent End-Point of Multiple Interacting Systems?. To appear in J.BURACK, T. CHARMAN, N. YIRMIYA & P.R. ZELAZO (Eds). Perspectives on Development in Autism. Erlbaum, 2001. In Short Loan Essential

Bowler, D.M. & Briskman, J.A. (2000). Photographic cues do not always facilitate performance on false belief tasks in children with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 30, 305-316.

Bowler, D.M., Briskman, J. & Grice, S. (1999). Experimenter effects on children’s understanding of false drawings and false beliefs. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 160, 443-460. Recommended

Bowler, D.M., Briskman, J.A. & Gurvidi, N. (under review). Understanding the mind or predicting signal-dependant action?: Performance of children with and without autism on analogues of the false belief task. Manuscript under review. Available from Short Loan. Recommended

Bowler, D.M., Gardiner, J.M. & Grice, S. (2000). Episodic memory and remembering in high-functioning adults with autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, Background

Bowler, D.M. & Thommen, E. (2000). Attribution of mechanical and social causality to animated displays by children with autism. Autism, 4, 147-171. Background

Charman, T. (2000). Theory of mind and the early diagnosis of autism. In. S.Baron-Cohen, H.Tager-Flusberg & D.Cohen (eds.). Understanding Other Minds, Perspectives from Cognitive Neuroscience, 2^nd. Edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Background (c)

                    Frith, U. (1989). Autism: Explaining the Enigma. Oxford:Blackwell. Essential (c)

                    Happé, F.G.E. (1994). Autism. London: University College London Press. Essential (c)

Hobson, R.P. (1990). On acquiring knowledge about people and the capacity to pretend: Response to Leslie (1987). Psychological Review, 97, 114-121. Background

                    Hobson, R.P. (1993). Autism and The Development of Mind. Hove: Erlbaum. Background (c)

Hughes, C. & Russell, J. (1993). Autistic children’s difficulty with mental disengagement from an object: Its implications for theories of autism. Developmental Psychology, 29, 498-510. Background

Leekam, S. & Perner, J. (1991). Does the autistic child have a metarepresentational deficit?. Cognition, 40, 203-318.

Leslie, A. & Roth, D. (1993). What autism teaches us about metarepresentation. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg & D. Cohen (Eds.). Understanding Other Minds: Perspectives from Autism (pp. 83-111). Oxford: Oxford Medical Publications. Background

Leslie, A.M. & Frith, U. (1990). Prospects for a cognitive neuropsychology of autism: Hobson's choice. Psychological Review. 97, 122-131. Background

Leslie, A.M. & Thaiss, L. (1992). Domain specificity in conceptual development: Neuropsychological evidence from autism. Cognition, 43, 225-251. Background

Mitchell, P. (1996). Acquiring a Concept of Mind : A review of Psychological Research and Theory. Hove : Psychology Press. Recommended (c)

                    Mitchell, P. (1997). Introduction to theory of mind : children, autism and apes. Arnold.                                             Recommended (c)

                    Russell, J. (1998). Autism as an Executive Disorder. Oxford : Oxford University Press. Essential (c)

                    Bremner, J.G. (1994). Infancy (2nd edition). Oxford: Blackwell. Essential (c)

Bremner, J,G., Slater, A. & Butterworth, G. (1997). Infant development : recent advances. Hove: Psychology Press. Essential (c)

Gergely, G., Nadasdy, Z., Csibra, G. & Biro, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56, 165-193. Background

                    Mehler, J. & Dupoux, E. (1994). What Infants Know. Oxford: Blackwell. Essential (c)

Newson, J. (1979). The growth of shared understangings between infant and caregiver. In M. Bullowa (ed.).Before Speech. London: Cambridge University Press. Essential (c)

Oates, J. & Sheldon, S. (Eds) (1987). Cognitive Development in Infancy. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Readings in Section II: Infant Learning, Reading 14 by Bower (1967) and reading 16 by Bretherton et al. Recommended (c)

Phillips, J.L. (1969). The Origins of the Intellect: Piaget's Theory. San Francisco: WH Freeman. Chapters 1 & 2. Recommended (c)

                    Premack, D. (1990). The infant's theory of self-propelled objects. Cognition, 36, 1-16. Background

                    Slater, A. (1992). Infant development: The origins of competence. The Psychologist, 3, 109-113.                         Essential

                    Slater, A. & Bremner, J.G. (Eds) (1989). Infant Development. Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.                         Recommended (c)

Sorce, J.F., Emde, R.N., Campos, J. & Klinnert, M.D. (1985). Maternal emotional signalling: Its effect on the visual cliff behaviour of 1-year-olds. Developmental Psychology, 21, 195-200. Background

Spelke, E., Breinlinger, K., Macomber, J. & Jacobsen, K. (1992). Origins of knowledge.Psychological Review, 99, 605-632. Recommended

Trevarthen, C. (1979). Communication and cooperation in early infancy: a description of primary intersubjectivity. In M. Bullowa (ed.). Before Speech. London: Cambridge University Press. Recommended (c)

The really keen should dip in to Piaget's (1957) The Origins of Intelligence in Children, London: Routledge - an original source if ever there was one!

Dockrell, J., Campbell, R. & Nielson, I. (1980). Conservation accidents revisited. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 3, 423-439. Recommended

Doise, W., Mugny, G. & Perret-Clermont, A-N. (1975). Social interaction and the development of cognitive operations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 367-383. Recommended

                    Donaldson, M. (1978). Children's Minds. London: Fontana. Essential (c)

Hinde, R., Perret-Clermont, A-N. & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1985). Social Relatonships and Cognitive Development. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Chapters 19, 20, 21 & 22. Background (c)

                    Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992). Beyond Modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT. Recommended (c)

Light, P. (1983). Social interaction and cognitive development: a review of post-Piagetian research. In S. Meadows (ed.), Developing Thinking, London: Methuen. Recommended (c)

Light, P. (1986). Context, conservation and conversation. In M. Richards & P.Light (eds.), Children of Social Worlds. London: Polity. Recommended (c)

                    McGarrigle, J. & Donaldson, M. (1975). Conservation accidents. Cognition, 3, 341-350.                        Recommended

McShane, J. (1991). Cognitive Development: An Information-Processing Account. Oxford: Blackwell. Chapters 5&9. Essential (c)

Munakata, Y. (1998). Infant perseveration and implications for object permanence theories: A PDP model of the AB task. Developmental Science,1, 161-184. Read the commentaries that follow. Background

Nielson, I. & Dockrell, J. (1982). Cognitive tasks as interactional settings. In G. Butterworth & P. Light (eds.), Social Cognition: Studies of the Development of Understanding. Brighton: Harvester Press. Background (c)

Pinard, A. & Laurendeau, M. (1969). "Stage" in Piaget's cognitive-developmental theory: Exegesis of a concept. In D. Elkind and J.H. Flavell (eds.) Studies in Cognitive Development. London: Oxford University Press. Background (c)

Plunkett, K., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Bates, E., Elman, J.L., & Johnson, M.H. (1997). Connectionism and developmental psychology. Journal Of Child Psychology And Psychiatry, 38, 53-80. Essential

Dermot Bowler 2001/2

The coursework for this part of the course is a little different from what you are typically used to. Each option consists of two parts. The first, which counts for 70% of the marks consists of an traditional essay, which should be no more than 1,500 words long. The key to keeping to the required length (and to getting good marks!!) is to stick to the question you are asked. Irrelevant material, however well presented will not get credit and will lose you marks indirectly because it wastes words that could otherwise be used on more relevant points. So read the question carefully, and before you include anything, ask yourself if it is relevant. If it is not, then leave it out.

The second part, which counts for 30% of the marks) follows the same format for all options. You should find a recent (no earlier than 1996) empirical article from a peer-reviewed journal that describes an investigation into a problem that is relevant to the essay topic you have chosen. PLEASE NOTE: If you submit a report on an article dated earlier than 1996, you will automatically get ZERO marks, with no possibility of re-submission. Your task is to design an investigation that would enlarge upon the conclusions of the study you have chosen. So you need to read the article, summarise what was done and what was found, and identify a question that arises from these findings (showing how you have arrived at this question and why you think it is important). You then should outline how you would carry out a further study to answer this question, stating how you would interpret all possible outcomes. This part of the coursework should be no more than 1,000 words long.

To find relevant articles, you should do a literature search using either PsychInfo or the Web of Science (details available in the library). Part of the assessment is to see if you can judge for yourself whether an article is relevant or not. You should make sure that it is an original report of an empirical investigation. So literature reviews, book chapters or summaries of other work are not appropriate. It should come from a peer-reviewed journal – examples are Child Development or the British Journal of Developmental Psychology. Periodicals such as newspapers, men’s (or women’s) magazines, or websites should not be used. A copy of the article should be included with the coursework

Both parts of the coursework should be stapled together and submitted along with the article. Only one cover sheet is required.

1). What are the important conceptual issues to consider when evaluating research on children’s understanding of objects? How well have these issues been taken on board by recent research in the area?

2). In what ways do studies of infants’ perception of events help our understanding of the start of social understanding?

3). Defend or refute the view that cognitive development is solely a function of what happens inside the child’s head.

                   4). Do we need theories of development? Why?

                   5). How successful have psychologists been at explaining autism as a developmental disorder?