With this setup, the child can clearly see that the experimenter can see the child's point of view, so I think that using the two-sided picture is much more informative and it diminishes ambiguity of results.
Hello, my name is Armando Plascencia and I am the Student Accommodations Coordinator for Student Disability Resources at California State University Monterey Bay. The purpose of this letter is to request authorization to modify this video as instructional audiovisual material to include adequate captioning for deaf and hard of hearing students attending CSU Monterey Bay. The video will be used solely for educational purposes. The video in question is another video on your channel, titled Piaget - Object permanence failure (Sensorimotor Stage).
So, y’all wanna get scared? I regularly talk to people who play videos games who fail to understand this concept 😂 I didn’t see this till AFTER social media became as popular as it is today 😅
I heavily doubt that. They may not understand the theoretical concept, but applying it is something we all do. Except for maybe super retarded people and Donald Trump.
Eeehm She can probably see everything from her perspective, because she is tall enough to see over the hill and the volcano. Pause at 0:36, she can see the litle bush to his right and maybe even the things behind the volcano, at least the white owl, because the owl is not directly behind the volcano. It's close, but I'm wondering why they did this with this landscape instead of something that is clearly just visible from one side. Also the video cuts at 1:02 when he was maybe about to correctly tell her about the tree and the cat on her side. Also for telling her what she sees, he needs to have memorized it. How do we know he was able to do that? (Maybe should have asked him: What did you see previously when you were on my side.) And this is supposed to be real science ... How do we know that the child wasn't just thinking: "Well, she's so tall, she probably sees over the top of the hill and volcano and can see the things on my side, too, so I'm telling her about them." So many questions. This experiment proofs nothing IMO.
Seriously? Thats a problem for u? Smh.. i had a baby bracelet amd a ring.. i still have them and they will be worn by kids as well.. nothing wrong with putting jewelry on a child.. it cud teach them how to.care for their personal belongings as well..
@@aziaoli7710 It has now been proven that giving children jewelry reduces a child's ability to spell, use proper grammar, and avoid making other people's points for them.
![⭐️( ลอยกระทง 2024 ) Ver. แดนซ์ Remix BY [ ดีเจกิต รีมิกซ์ ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/rMWOLhgXUHc/mqdefault.jpg)
this video shows the cognitive and physical development of under the7 years old point of view to support Piaget's concrete operational stage.
With this setup, the child can clearly see that the experimenter can see the child's point of view, so I think that using the two-sided picture is much more informative and it diminishes ambiguity of results.
Oh my goodness they are so adorable
right?? completely adorable
Hello, my name is Armando Plascencia and I am the Student Accommodations Coordinator for Student Disability Resources at California State University Monterey Bay. The purpose of this letter is to request authorization to modify this video as instructional audiovisual material to include adequate captioning for deaf and hard of hearing students attending CSU Monterey Bay. The video will be used solely for educational purposes. The video in question is another video on your channel, titled Piaget - Object permanence failure (Sensorimotor Stage).
youll most likely not get an answer from the uploader as they havent uploaded a video in 7 years
This isn't an official channel for this study or anything like that. Just some random guy who uploaded it 7 years ago.
THE CLOSED CAPTIONS ARE VULGAR. THIS NEEDS TO BE REMOVED/FIXED.
OMG, YOURE CORRECT!! in the second part… yikes!
So, y’all wanna get scared?
I regularly talk to people who play videos games who fail to understand this concept 😂
I didn’t see this till AFTER social media became as popular as it is today 😅
oh my god really??? Like grown people who don't understand this? that's terrifying
I heavily doubt that. They may not understand the theoretical concept, but applying it is something we all do. Except for maybe super retarded people and Donald Trump.
Eeehm She can probably see everything from her perspective, because she is tall enough to see over the hill and the volcano. Pause at 0:36, she can see the litle bush to his right and maybe even the things behind the volcano, at least the white owl, because the owl is not directly behind the volcano. It's close, but I'm wondering why they did this with this landscape instead of something that is clearly just visible from one side.
Also the video cuts at 1:02 when he was maybe about to correctly tell her about the tree and the cat on her side.
Also for telling her what she sees, he needs to have memorized it. How do we know he was able to do that? (Maybe should have asked him: What did you see previously when you were on my side.)
And this is supposed to be real science ...
How do we know that the child wasn't just thinking: "Well, she's so tall, she probably sees over the top of the hill and volcano and can see the things on my side, too, so I'm telling her about them."
So many questions. This experiment proofs nothing IMO.
a alguien mas le sale mas traducido al español?
“and him.” lol
lol
pur Egocentrism lol
Бля я не знаю английский
Who puts jewelry on a child?
@@sg8126 Jewelry = love.
Seriously? Thats a problem for u? Smh.. i had a baby bracelet amd a ring.. i still have them and they will be worn by kids as well.. nothing wrong with putting jewelry on a child.. it cud teach them how to.care for their personal belongings as well..
@@aziaoli7710 It has now been proven that giving children jewelry reduces a child's ability to spell, use proper grammar, and avoid making other people's points for them.
@@MrPlucer source?
@@nopenotforme9127 See above thread for evidence.