1. PSYA3 – Cognition and
development:
Cognition and
Development Spec
Development of
thinking
• Theories of development: Piaget, Vygotsky, Bruner
• Applications of these theories to education
Development of
moral
understanding
• Theories of moral understanding (Kohlberg) and/orprosocial
reasoning (Eisenberg)
Development of
social cognition
• Development of child’s sense of self (theory of mind) – Baron-
Cohen
• Development of children’s understanding of others, including
perspective (Selman)
• Biological explanations of social cognition, including the role of
the mirror neuron system

2. Definitions:
Word Definition
Schema Cluster of related facts based on previous
experiences, used to create future expectations/A
hypothetical mental construct that contains your
knowledge about a specific topic. E.g. gender
Assimilation (links to equilibrium) Process of fitting new experiences into
existing schemas without making a
change (Piaget)
Accommodation Adjusting/changing a schema to fit new
conflicting information (otherwise a
disequilibrium is created)
Disequilibrium Confusion between existing schemas and
new experiences
Equilibrium A balance between existing schemas and
new experiences
Trial and error Trying something multiple times til you
get it right

3. Word Definition
Cognitive development Development of thought processes
Constructivist Knowledge is developed/built up over
time
Object permanence Whether something disappears when it is
hidden, or not
Conservation Ability to understand concepts like mass,
weight, volume, area
Egocentrism Not aware of other people’s perspectives
Laboratory experiment Studies conducted in a lab study with
controlled variables
Investigator bias Beliefs of the investigator skews research
Demand characteristics When ppts act differently as they predict
what the researcher is looking for

4. Example:
Jack knows that he can put the
green triangle shape into the
triangle shape in his wooden
shape sorter. When he is given a
different coloured triangle shape
he can make it fit into the
triangle shape. However, when
he is given a green square shape,
he can’t fit it in the triangle
shaped hole. He gets frustrated,
but keeps on playing and
eventually manages to fit the
shape into the square hole.
Schema
Assimilation
Causing equilibrium
Disequilibrium
Trial and error
Accommodation

5. Problems with
using children in
research
Children may not fully
understand questions
(extraneous variables)
Reductionist – Only
cognitive?
Ethical issues: Consent
– depends on age of
kids
Social desirability bias
– act in a certain way
to please researcher?
If children don’t
understand, reliability
and validity is reduced
Ethical issues: Protection from
harm – being studied at such a
young age could impact future
Interviewer bias e.g.
Piaget who studies his
own kids!!
Demand characteristics –
less relevant with really
young kids

6. Piaget:

7. Theories of development – Piaget:
Jean Piaget (1896-1980):
- Biologist (objective
methods/tests)
- Combines both nature & nurture
- He believes you have to have a
developed brain (more holistic)
- Constructivist (develop thoughts
through construction of schemas)
- Studied kiddies
- Differs from Vygotsky as Piaget
believes that DEVELOPMENT
proceeds learning, whereas
Vygotsky believed the opposite

8. Sensorimotor(0-2)
Sensorimotor (0-2)
Lack of object
permanence: E.g. if a
mum hid behind her
hands, the baby would
think that she’s gone
Circular reactions:
Repeat same actions
over again
Use senses to learn
about the
environment
Pre-operational(2-7)
Pre-operational (2-7)
Cannot do conservation
tasks as they do not
understand mass,
volume, area, weight
Egocentric: Not aware of
other people’s
perspectives
Development of
symbolic functions:
Things may look
taller/longer but they
are the same, Kids don’t
understand this
Concreteoperational(7-11)
Concrete operational (7-
11)
Develop logical
reasoning and begin to
recognize that
quantities do not
change even if the
volume changes
So, can do conservation
tasks
Formaloperational(11+)
Formal operational
(11+)
Abstract
thinking, where
problems are solved
using the hypothetico-
deductive reasoning
Children also display
idealistic
thinking, where they can
begin to imagine how
things might change
Piaget’s stages of cognitive development:

9. Refuting research for Piaget’s stage 1:
Hood and Willats (1986):
• Lab study
• Testing object permanence in kids
• Five-month-old infants shown an
object (either on left or right);
their arms were held down, lights
were switched off
• Kids were more likely to reach out
to the side the object was shown
Evaluation:
•  Ethical issues:
- informed consent
- Protection from harm
 Object permanence
developed earlier than Piaget
suggested
 Deterministic – individual
differences not considered
 Lab study:
- Objective, quantitative
 Lacks eco validity

10. Research for stage 2 – Piaget & three
mountains, Hughes (1975)
Piaget:
Used three mountains and a
doll.
Researchers asked the child
to say what perspective
the doll would have whilst
looking at the mountains
The child was only able to
give their own
perspective
Hughes (1975):
Claimed that if the task was
more realistic
Such as a naughty boy doll
hiding from a policeman
The children would be able
to give the perspective of
the policeman

11. Research for stage 3 – Piaget:
- Children under 7 were not able to understand
that volume didn’t change if the container of
liquids changed
- Children above 7 were able to do this

12. Research for stage 4 – Piaget and
Inhelder (1958):
- Used a pendulum problem to
test whether children would be
able to devise an experiment to
test 3 variables of the pendulum
- Their findings supported Piaget’s
stage 4
- Dasen (1994): Claims only a
third of adults only ever reach
this stage, and even then, not
during adolescence.

13. Summary of stages:

14. Evaluation of Piaget:
Objective :
- Based on scientific research which is
replicable, and scientific and stuff
- Piaget’s research was conducted on lab
studies, therefore variables are controlled, and
more likely to be replicated
- If consistent results are achieved, it could also be
deemed reliable
- However, since Hood and Willatrefuted Piaget…
It’s probably not that reliable.

15. Evaluation of Piaget:
Deterministic :
- Idea that behaviour is predetermined
- Shown through the stages of behaviour
- Refuted by Hood and Willats (1986) as
children had found object permanence by 5
months rather than 0-2 years
- Links to Kohlberg

16. Evaluation of Piaget:
Ecological validity :
- Whether or not the study is applicable outside of
the experiment
- Piaget’s studies were conducted in labs, which
may not be applicable to real life
- ‘Supporting research’ such as that by Hood and
Willats (1986)
- It could also be argued that these lab studies may
have provided uncomfortable places for kids…

17. Evaluation of Piaget:
Ethical issues :
- Such as informed consent/protection from harm
- Studies carried out on children who may not have
been able to give informed consent
- Further evidence by Hood and Willat (1986) may
also have not considered from protection from
harm, as 5-month old infants had their arms
pinned down in the dark (scary!)
- However, lab studies are good, because of
objectivity…

18. Vygotsky:

19. Lev Vygotsky (1896-1934) – died
young:
• Russian psychological
• Theorist (never conducted
studies)
• Social constructivist (learning
from others through society)
• Differs from Piaget who says you
learn through own experiences
(trial and error)
• Importance of language, culture,
and social interaction

20. Vygotsky’s theory of proximal
development:
• Baby starts off being able to do simplistic tasks,
such as: babbling, eating with fingers, but they’re
dressed by others etc
• Which then become more complex as full
potential is reached, where babbling becomes
talking, and they begin to be able to use cutlery
and stuff.
• Pass from CURRENT ABILITY -> POTENTIAL, by
passing through the ‘zone of proximal
development’

21. So, Vygotsky basically said…
• Learning proceeds development
• We learn through tasks.
• If they’re too easy, we find them boring, but if
they’re too hard, they’re frustrating.
• The ZPD shows the tasks that are only JUST out of
our reach, however with encouragement and
guidancefromsomeone else we can do it.
• Similar to Piaget, both of them believe children
learn through their environment

23. Nunes (1992):
• Vygotsky said cognitive
development was supported by
context/culture
• Study involving Brazillian street
children (Nunes)
• They had no formal schooling
• Learnt numeracy skills which
were ‘internalised’ by working
with adults

24. Nunes (1992) AO2:
Supports Vygotsky
because the children
were able to learn from
only working with
adults
Street children, may not
be generalisable
Ethnocentric (Brazil)
Hard to replicate due to
EVs (lack of control)
therefore reduced
reliability
Observation
Ecological validity
Naturalistic

25. Wood and Middleton (1975):
• 12 mothers,asked to teach 4 year
old children how to do a jigsaw
• Teaching session was observed and
recorded
• Support by mothers was
categorised into 5 groups (from
hands-on help, to verbal help)
• Most successful were mothers who
adapted their guidance depending
on the needs of the child
• i.e. Stepped up when needed help
& backed off when they didn’t

26. Wood and Middleton AO2:
 Supports Vygotsky in that
the mother is giving enough
guidance for the child to
move the ‘puzzle-doing
ability’ to move through the
ZPD, but continues to allow
the child to do it at it’s own
pace so it doesn’t get
bored. But the mother also
doesn’t take over
completely, because that
would frustrate the child.
 Conducted in own home
(good) but mum’s may get
social desirability bias
 Small sample size (though
the aim wasn’t to be able to
generalise)
 Observational – detailed
data
 Recorded (can watch back)
 Qualitative, but categories
make it quantitative
 No ethical issues (not
stressful)
 Lab study

27. Evaluation of Vygotsky:
Subjective:
- Vygotsky was a theorist which means that he
didn’t conduct any experiments of his own
- However, was because language and thoughts are
difficult to study empirically
- Contrasts Piaget that had lots of research
- Which means Piaget is more likely to be
quantitative and reliable

28. Evaluation of Vygotsky:
Application to real life:
- His theories can be used in practical ways like
in education
- Could be used in classrooms, where older
students could teach the less-able students
- It’s also good because it considers individual
differences to an extent…

29. Evaluation of Vygotsky:
Individual differences:
- Looks at uniqueness of individuals
- Looked at various cultures
- Such as Nunes(1992) with his Brazillian street
children who learned numeracy skills
- Contrasts standard classroom teaching
- But increases the generalisability of
Vygotskian theory

30. Evaluation of Vygotsky:
• Supporting research - Wood and Middleton
(1975):
• Their study suggests that children do indeed
learn through their environment by the help of
their mothers
• This supports the idea that learning proceeds
development also as children are taught how to
do the puzzle by their caregivers so that they can
then internalise the behaviour and be able to do
it themselves

32. • PIAGET SAID THAT
BEHAVIOUR PROCEEDS
LEARNING
• PBL
• VYGOTSKY SAID THAT
LEARNING PROCEEDS
BEHAVIOUR
• VLB

33. Application to education:

34. Piaget theory to education:
Maturation: Child learns through self-
exploration and discovery. It’s all about their
own rate of exploration.
‘Child as a scientist’

35. Piaget – application to education:
Readiness:
• Influenced how children
were taught
• ‘Concrete’ thinking subjects
from 7-11, best suited for
project-work
• ‘Abstract’ thinking subjects
(chemistry/physics)
introduced later
Discovery learning:
• Children being able to
explore themselves and
manipulate materials, such
as sand and water
• (like when you’re a bubba
and you build sandcastles
and stuff)

36. Supporting and refuting Piaget…
Plowden Report
(HMSO 1967):
• Seeing children as
individuals requiring
different attention
• Teacher helps them
based on their own
ability
Piaget’s theories are also
applicable to erryday
life
Sylva (1987):
• Argued that
discovery
learning is not
always the best
way

37. Vygotsky’s theory to education:
Zone of Proximal Development: The things that
we cannot achieve on our own and we need
guidance to learn it. If we have help, then we
can move things out of our ZPD as we learn
them.
‘Child as an apprentice’

38. Vygotsky – Application to education:
Scaffolding:
• Language is well important
• At first you imitate adults,
without understanding
• Then there’s self guidance
where the child begins to
understand and then…
• Internalisation occurs, where
the child understand
• Teacher provides the
scaffolding for learning, which
can then be ‘removed’ when
the child has learned and
passed through the ZPD
Peer mentoring:
• Older child works with a
younger child to assist
learning

39. Supporting Vygotsky – Tzuriel and
Shamir (2007):
• In Israel, year 1 kids paired with year 3 kids
• 89 in each year
• Year 3 taught year 1 to use a multimedia
computer programme
• It was found to benefit both children
• Most beneficial when there was a mismatch
between cognitive development

40. Vygotsky doesn’t consider all societies
– Stigler and Perry (1990):
• Looking at relevance of Vygotsky’s
work to both constructivist and
individualist societies
• Believed that his theory is more
suited to constructivist cultures
• Stigler and Perry compared
American and Asian schools
• They found that Asian schools were
taught maths more effectively
using group work, than
individualist American classes

41. Development of moral
understanding:

42. Kohlberg’s theory of moral
development:
Participants were presented a series of moral
dilemmas such as the Heinz scenario. From
this, Kohlberg developed his theory of
morality.

43. Kohlberg - (1963, 1978):
Cognitive aspect
of psychology
What you should or
shouldn’t do
Behavioral
aspect of
morality
How you respond
to a moral dilemma
Affective
(emotional)
aspect of
morality
Feelings of shame
v.s. guilt

44. The Heinz Dilemma:
In Europe, a woman was near death from a rare kind of
cancer. There was one drug that the doctors thought
might save her. It was a form of radium that a druggist
in the same town had recently discovered. The drug
was expensive to make, but the druggist was charging
ten times what the drug cost him to make. He paid
$200 for the radium and charged $2,000 for a small
dose of the drug. The sick woman's husband, Heinz,
went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but
he could only get together about $ 1,000 which is half
of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was
dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay
later. But the druggist said: "No, I discovered the drug
and I'm going to make money from it." So Heinz got
desperate and broke into the man's store to steal the
drug-for his wife. Should the husband have done that?"
(Kohlberg, 1963).

45. Kohlberg’s theory of moral
development stages:
• 1. Obedience to avoid punishment
• 2. Obedience to obtain rewards
Pre-conventional 4-10: Children
accept rules, judge actions by
consequences, dependent on
punishment/rewards
• 3. Seeking the approval of others (peers)
• 4. Respect of authority and maintaining social
order
Conventional 10-14:
Conforming to social rules,
maintaining current social
systems to ensure positive
relationships
• 5. Obeying the law, however individual rights can
displace laws
• 6. Morality in line with universal moral principles
Post-conventional 15+:
Stop following social norms,
internalise beliefs, morality
based on own interpretations of
societies

46. Supporting – Kohlberg (1968):
A – Investigate how morality is developed
P – 75 boys (5-17), longitudinal, USA (Also,
Taiwan, Mexico and other cultures… Making it
cross-sectional), used the Heinz dilemma
along with others
F – Developed the 6 stages of moral
development (pre-, conventional, post-)
C – There are sequential stages of the
development of morality

47. Evaluating Kohlberg (1968):
• Cross-sectional
(different people from
different cultures being
compared)
• Longitudinal (lots of
research)
• Used his own research
to produce the theory
• Deterministic
• Androcentric
• Hypothetical moral
dilemmas may not have
mundane realism

48. A02 Androcentrism - Gilligan (1994):
• Claimed it may not be generalisable to females
• She used quasi-research (natural) on women &
their views on abortion
• 29 women (aged 15-33)
• Gilligan believed… Girls = more caring,
• Boys = believe more in justice (Link to ES theory
by Baron-Cohen, 2002)
• Kohlberg failed to distinguish between genders,
therefore validity and reliability is questionable.

49. AO2 Ecological validity – Moral
thinking vs. Behaviour:
• Kohlberg may not have ecological validity
because he uses hypothetical moral dilemmas
where people may think they will act different
to how they actually might.
• Also, it could be affected by social desirability
bias.

50. AO2 Cultural relativism – Snarey
(1985):
• Meta-analysis of 45 cross-cultural studies (may not
have internal validity as methods used may be
different)
• 27 different countries
• Used MJI (measurement of morality)
• Found trend to SUPPORT KOHLBERG
• Highest level of post-conventional were in
industrialised societies
 Supported by Colby et al (1983)
 Supported by Gibbs et al (2007) using 75 cross-cultural
studies in 23 countries

51. AO2 Determinism – Dunn and Brown
(1994):
• Deterministic sequential stages were refuted
by Dunn and Brown who found that…
• Children began to develop morality at 2
• Using naturalistic observations
 Research is observational, may be more
ecologically valid than Kohlberg’s hypothetical
moral dilemmas

52. Development of social cognition:
SENSE OF SELF

53. Key terms for social cognition:
• Social cognition – How people process social
information, especially its encoding, storage,
retrieval, and application to social situations
• Biological psychology – Psychology based on
brain damage, genetics, biochemistry. It uses
lab studies and objective methods to conduct
empirical experiments to obtain results

54. Focussing on 3 areas:
1. Self awareness - Knowing that you are separate from
other people, and have your own identity (Tested by
Lewis and Brook-Gunn)
2. Theory of Mind – Understanding that other people
have different thoughts and feelings to your own. No
longer egocentric. Develops at 4 years. Tested by false
belief tasks. (Tested by Wimmer and Perner)
3. Theory of Mind (autism) – Also says that ToM
develops around the age of 4 (Tested by Baron-Cohen)

55. Self awareness (sense of self): Lewis
and Brooks-Gunn ‘Rouge Test’ (1979):
• Dot placed on child’s head
• Younger children do not make the connection between their
reflection and themselves
• After around 18 months, the child has the ability to recognise
themselves
• IV = age DV = Recognition USA Lab study Overt obs.

56. Lewis and Brook-Gunn’s - AO2
 Lab study
 Children less likely to be
affected by demand
characteristics
 Ecological validity may be
lacking as it was a
conducted in a laboratory
study (their own home,
yet it would be different
when being observed etc)
 Cultural relativism – some
cultures may be less likely
to look in mirrors than
others

57. Theory of Mind:
• Theory of mind (ToM) – First thought to begin
around the age of 3 or 4. Children can use
words like ‘think’ or ‘know’ when describing
someone else, as it is the understanding that
other people think differently to you.
• AKA… Ability to intuitively comprehend that
other people have mental states
(beliefs/desires/knowledge etc)

58. Theory of Mind - Wimmer and Perner
‘False belief task’ (1983):
• Used ‘maxi-doll’ and mother doll
• Given a scenario to 4-5 year olds
• Maxi had chocolate and put it in a
blue cupboard
• Mother moved it to a green
cupboard when maxi leaves the
room
• Maxi returns, where will he look
for the choc?
• Kids below 4 would say ‘look in the
green cupboard’
• Kids above 4 would say ‘look in
blue cupboard’
• Lab study, observation

59. Wimmer and Perner (1983) - AO2:
 Lab study
 Children less likely to
have demand
characteristics
 Higher ecological validity
because dolls are being
used, which are like
imagination games than
children play
 Children may not fully
understand the question
being asked

60. Theory of Mind (autism) – Baron-
Cohen et al (1985):
• Used typically and atypically
developing children
• 61 children used (varied ages, but
matched on mental capabilities)
• Given story of ‘Sally and Anne’ &
asked 3 questions to test their belief,
reality, and memory
• All answered reality and memory
questions correctly, but the belief Q
(which tested ToM) was not:
86% of Down’s Syndrome children were
correct
85% of ‘normally’ developing children
were correct
20% of autistic children were correct
• Suggests people with autism may
lack ToM

61. Baron-Cohen et al (1985) - AO2:
 Baron-Cohen matched
children on their mental
capabilities ensuring that
results weren’t down to
difference in intelligence
 Parental consent was
gathered and would have
been important for
atypically developing
children especially
 May not have understood
how the question was
worded
 Individual differences as
20% of autistic children
passed, but 80% of
children did not

62. Overall AO2 for Sense of self:
Lab studies used  - Like in
Lewis and Brook-Gunn’s
research, which means high
levels of control etc…
Nature vs Nurture  - Looking
at nurture, and how a child
develops through
experience, like in Lewis
and Brook-Gunn’s how the
child has to learn about
their sense of self etc
Ethical issues  - Such as
protection from harm,
consent & anonymity like
Baron-Cohen et al. By using
autistic children in an
unfamiliar environment, it
could be distressing for
them
Deterministic  - Research
suggests children develop at
the same pace

63. Selman – Intro:
Taking other people’s
perspectives is well
important because…
Helps you to empathise
Allows you to integrate with
other’s more successfully
Learn different skills

64. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
– (1980):
• Like Kohlberg, Selman used a hypothetical dilemma to help to
understand perspective.
• The dilemma goes as follows:
‘Holly is an 8 year old who likes to climb trees. She is the best tree
climber in the neighbourhood. One day whilst climbing a tree she
falls off the bottom branch but does not hurt herself. Her father sees
her fall and he is upset. He makes her promise not to climb any trees
again.
Later that day, Holly and her friends meet Sean. His kitten is caught up
a tree and cannot get down. Something has to be done right away
or the cat will fall. Holly is the only one who can climb trees well
enough to reach the kitten, but she remembers her promise to her
father’

65. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
(1980):
• Split into 5 stages
• The ages overlap as Selman believes that
children could be at different stages of
development in the different domains of
social experience
• Development could depend on: friendships,
peer relationships, and relationships with
parents

66. •3-6 years
•Holly may generalise her views and assume her dad has the same
wants as her
Undifferentiated
perspective taking
(UP)
•5-9 years
•Holly knows people have different views as they have access to
different information, she may not understand her dad’s emotional
wants though
Social-informational
perspective taking
(SIP)
•7-12 years
•See’s things from another point of view. Holly would want to avoid
punishment from her father
Self-reflective
perspective taking
(SRP)
•10-15 years
•Imagine the situation from a bystanders perspective, she may save
the cat to please her peers
Third party
perspective taking
(TPP)
•14-adulthood
•Child understands that third party can be influenced by cultural
norms and values, society may want her to save the kitten because
it’s vulnerable
Societal perspective
taking (SP)

67. Selman et al (1983):
• Got girls to work in
small groups and make
puppets to then put on
a puppet show
• Those who scored more
highly on perspective
taking were observed to
communicate better as
part of a group

68. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
AO2:
Deterministic:
The stages are in a set order (LIKE KOHLBERGS
STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT) however,
due to the age range of the stages
overlapping, Selman has a moral flexible
model than Kohlberg or any other fixed-stage
model
Therefore considering individual differences
more…

69. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
AO2:
Individual differences/Subjective:
Stages depend on the individual going through
them, some people develop differently.
The means of testing them are highly subjective
also because it’s all based on opinion

70. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
AO2:
Ethnocentric:
Different cultures have different cultural norms.
So, in some places, the idea of saving a cat (in
regard to Holly’s dilemma) may not be the
preferred, or perhaps parents are more strict.
People from collectivist cultures (larger families)
may think about this from an earlier age than
people from individualistic cultures.

71. Selman’s theory of perspective taking
AO2:
Historical validity:
Contemporary society, such as ours which has
mobile phones, and the ability to contact
pretty much anyone instantaneously could
mean that Holly’s dilemma is less appropriate
these days as arguably, she could just call her
dad rather than panic and tiiiing.

72. Biological explanations of social
cognition:

73. Mirror neurones:
• Discovered in the 1990’s
• These neurones are nerve cells that react
when a person performs an action, but also
when they observe or even hear someone
performing an action

74. Mirror neurons – Rizzolattiet al (1996):
A – to test whether the mirror neurons fire when
observing another organism carrying out a
movement
P – Tested monkeys, EEG used, lab study
F – Neurons in the MOTOR CORTEX fire both when
the monkey carries out an action on an object,
but also when the SEE, or even HEAR the action
C - Can be both auditory or visual stimuli, only
works if the action has an intention/carried out
on an object

75. Rizzolattiet al (1996) – evaluation:
• Supported by Di
Pellegrino et al (1992)
• Biological/objective/rep
licable/reliable
• Based on
neuropsychology
• Comparative/ethical
issues/may not be
generalisable

76. Mirror neurons – Lacoboniet al (2005):
A – To see if mirror neurons encode for both WHAT the
intention is, but also WHY
P – 23 ppts shown 3 different types of movie of a tea
party in a lab study, fMRI (functional MRI) recorded
neurone activity. The clips showed:
1. CONTEXT – before/after tea
2. ACTION – Hand grasps cup/clears cups away
3. INTENTION – Combined context/action
F – Highest level of MN activity from intention clip, shown
in INFERIOR FRONTAL CORTEX
C – Inferior frontal cortex is concerned with
understanding WHY a person behaves in a certain way

77. Lacoboniet al (2005) – evaluation:
• Biological/neuropsych/r
eplicable/reliable
• Deterministic
• Lab study
• Small sample size
• Low ecological validity
(who watches videos of
a tea party…?)

78. Main 4 points for AO2 evaluation:
1. Biological – objective/lab
studies/EEGS (Rizzolatti et
al 1996)/fMRI (Lacoboni et
al 2005)
2. Deterministic –
Genetics/Removes blame
from parents , though
they could also think it’s
their fault for passing on
genes… Doesn’t account
for inidivudal differences

1. Reductionist – Reduces
social cognition to
simplest form/should inc.
psychological factors
2. Comparative – May not
generalisable to
humans/Unethical/EEG’s
can be invasive/animals
have different anatomy