Recent developments in observational learning theory have made it clear that verbalization by observers has mediational functions and that model's response patterns play an important role in the attentional process of the observational learning. This experiment was designed to examine the effects of the model's response patterns and the verbalization by observers upon the observational learning.
The Ss (observers) were 66 second-grade school children with mean age of 8: 02. The observational learning task was a discrimination task and it consisted of color dimention (in the first task:red and blue, in the second task:yellow and black) and form dimension (in the first task:circle and regular triangle, in the second task:square and cross). 2×3 factorial design was introduced. The first factor was the response patterns of model, that is,(a) one model exhibits the correct responses dominantly (75% correct responses),(b) the other model exhibits the wrong responses dominantly (25% correct responses). The second factor was the three-fold types of verbalization by observer; (a) the observers in the first condition were instructed to verbalize the relevant dimension of the discrimination learning task,(b) in the second condition the obserbers were instructed to verbalize the irrelevant dimension of the task, and (c) no instructions about verbalization were given to the observers in the last condition. The Ss were randomly assigned to one of the six groups.
First of all the observers observed each model and they verbalized an appointed dimention every two trials that the model exhibited. Then, they were instructed to perform the same task as the model had exhibited, in order to examine whether the observational learning exists or not. At last the retention of learning was tested by asking them to perform once more the second task they can solve with the same principle.
The major findings of this experiment were as follows. In the observers' trials immediately after the observation of the model, the three groups in which the model exhibited correct responses dominantly performed significantly better than the other three groups. The response patterns of the model influenced the establishment of the observational learning. There were no significant differences as for the main effect of the verbalization. However, although differeces in this experiment were not statistically significant, it was suggested that the verbalization to the relevant dimension may facilitate the observational learning, when the model demonstrates the wronge responses dominantly.
In the retention and transfer, results of the secon ddiscrimination task were affected by the verbalization more than by the model's response patterns. Contrary to the first trials, no statistically significant differences were found in the condition of the model's response patterns. Two groups of Ss who verbalized the relevant dimension when they observed the model learned significantly faster than the other four groups. It was found that the discrimination learning was facilitated by verbalization to the relevant dimension.
Observational learning involved two representational systems, the imaginal and the verbal. The verbal representational system by humans, which accounted for the notable speed of the observational learning and long-term retention of modeled contents, involved the verbal coding of observed events. The implications of these results were discussed within the framework of the mediational theory of the observational learning.

View full abstract

The effect of temporal order structure and cog nitive content variables on understanding the instructional sentences of ordering syllogisms were studied in three experiments. In each experiment, 5 and 6 years old children participated in a task to solve 32 spatial ordering linear syllogisms containing the relation words: “in front of” and “behind”. The present author thought that the task-structure of syllogisms was composed of such two factors, as the type of relational inference and the direction of relational operation, and used those tasks as experimental tasks. Two types of sentences that had almost the same meaning but different grammatical structure, especially in temporal order position of relation words, were used.
The main findings were as follows.
(1) Such a sentence that the subject of the second prose was the logical actor, or that relational operation of both proses were based on the same anchor point but were different in direction, were understood easily (in Exp. I).
(2) In spite of having grammatical complexity, such a type of sentence with a relation word appearing early was easily understood (in Exp. II).
(3) It was difficult, for Ss who had low ability to grasp the relatedness of visual image, to understand the syllogisms task containing relational operations based on the different anchor point (in Exp. III).
These findings suggested that comprehensibility of these relational statements did not depend on the grammatical complexity of the sentence but on the content of sentence preparing cognitive framework that made Ss easily create a whole image of arrangements.
Finally, from these findings and suggestions, it was proposed that the processes of understanding these relational statements consisted of the following subprocesses: on hearing the first prose Ss create a spatial image based on relational operations, then when Ss hear the second prose, they use the spatial image as a cognitive framework to create a whole image. Based on these two processes, Ss understand the meaning of the whole sentence.

View full abstract

The purpose of this study was to establish a typology of parent-child rerations and father-mother relations by means of a children's questionnaire which is called “The EICA Parent-Child Relations Questionnaire.”
For this purpose it was neccessary (1) to confirm the fundamental dimensions of transferability between 4 kinds of the parent-child relations (son-father, son-mother, daughter-father and daughter-mother) by confirmatory factor analysis (Tsujioka, B. 1975, 1976, 1977),(2) to construct the valid scales to represent those confirmed primary factors by the principle of factor-truness instead of by that of internal consistency and (3) to determine the objective procedure to classify the children's profiles of the test scores for its father and mother.
According to the factor structures of the factor analyses of 4 kinds of samples and also of the total sample of the above 4 samples, conformed to the two forms of the Japanese adaptation of Schaefer's Children's Reports of Parental Behavior Inventory (Form-I of 26 scales and Form- II of 18 scales), 4 primary factors: Emotional Support (ES), Identification (ID), Control (CO), and Autonomy (AU) were confirmed and the second-order factors were interpreted as Acceptance-Rejection (AC·RE) and Control-Autonomy (CO·AU).
The valid items for each scale were selected from the results of item analysis of each kind of sample in order to always satisfy the principle of f actortrueness.
The Diagnostic Chart of Parent-Child Relations consisted of the Cartesian co-ordinate system of the above 2 second-order factor-scores calculated by computer program or manually by each child's profile in the test sheet as shown in FIG. I or FIG. 2.
On this chart, 10 kinds of types of parent-child relations and 7 kinds of father-mother relations could be determined either visually or by means of computer.
Attitudes and/or behaviors of every child's father or mother were classified into Acceptive (AC), Acceptive- Control (AC-CO), Control (CO), Rejective-Control (RE-CO), Rejective (RE), Rejective-Autonomous (RE-AU), Autonomous (AU), Acceptive-Autonomous (AC-AU), Average (A) or Quasi-Average (A') Type as shown in FIG. 3 and in TABLE 5.
The types of father-mother relations which were the combination types of the mutual relations between father and mother were classified into 7 kinds: Average (A), Quasi-Average (A'), Quasi-Quasi-Average (A), Conformative (B), Cooperative (B'), Opposite (C), and Independent (D) Types as shown in FIG. 3 and in TABLE 4.
According to TABLE 5, fathers' attitudes and/or behaviors towards children tended to be more Rejective, Rejective-Autonomous or Autonomous than mothers. On the other hand, more Acceptive or Acceptive-Control Types were seen among mothers.
In TABLE 5 of the combination types, Conformative and Cooperative Types were much more dominant than other types.
In a future study this typology could be testified from a clinical point of view especially concerning the objective understandings of the relationships between the parent-child relations and the child's personality formation as Tsujioka and Yamamoto (1977a) did in other articles.

View full abstract

The purposes of the present study are, 1) to introduce experimental education into the field of discrimination shift learning, and to teach a strategy for discrimination learning so that infants and young children can be mediational learners, 2) to examine the meanings of the 2nd stage (in which external acts based on objects are formed) and the 3rd stage (in which acts on the level of outer speech are formed) in P. Ya. Gal'perin's “theory of stage by stage formation of mental actions”, on which the present teaching programs are based.
One hundred and four 4-6 year-old preschool children served as subjects (Ss). A 2×2×4 factorial design was used which incorporated two levels of verbal ability (higher group: H. G. and lower group: L. G.), reversal shift (RS) and non-reversal shift (NRS) learning, 3 types of teaching methods (I-III) and a control group (IV).
In the pre-test, Ss were classified into two levels according to the scores for the task which required Ss to compare the sizes of interdimensional valueclasses This task is analogous to Piaget's “class inclusion task” (K. Shibata, 1976). Discrimination shift learning was crraied out one week after the pre-test. The problem in this learning was of two dimensions. The criterion at first and second learning was 10 consecutive correct responses. The experimental education was undertaken between the first and second learning. Teaching type I was that of controlling both external acts based on objects and acts on the level of outer speech. Type III was that of controlling only the external acts based on objects. Type IV was that of controlling the acts on the level of outer speech only. The Ss' acts in control group IV were not controlled by the experimenter on either stage. About one month after this experimental education, a follow-up test was given consisting of a retention test and a generalization test.
The main results were as follows:
1) Teaching type I and f had a significant effect not only on the H. G. but also on the L. G.
2) Type f had a signfficant effect on the H. G., but not on the L. G.
3) Type I had a significant effect in terms of retention and generalization.
4) Type II had an effect in terms of retention, but had no significant effect in terms of generalization.
Discussion:
1) The 2 criterions which have been frequently used to judge the effect of verbalization (or the occurrence of mediational responses) may not be useful.(a) There is a higher increasing in number of RS learners in the optional shift learning as compared to NRS, b) The RS task is more easily learned than the NRS task.) If the S responds logically in either RS or NRS learning with the 2 dimensional (2 values) stimuli, he could attain the criterion in a few trials, and hence there should be no significant difference between the two shifts.
2) The strategy, which would be used “in his mind” in the case of the human adult,“was externalized” to be taught to younger children. By doing this, the children could develop their strategy in a visible form, and the experimenter could control their thinking on that level.
3) It can be said that the Ss achieve the level of generalization when their acts of strategy shift from the stage of external acts based on objects to the stage of outer speech. For in shifting to the verbal stage they may free their acts from a direct dependence on concrete objects.

View full abstract

The present experiment was designed,(1) to clarify the functional characteristics of vicarious self reinforcement comparing with the function of vicarious external reinforcement, and (2) to estimate the relative effect of modeled performance level and modeled vicarious reinforcement patterns to the performances and self evaluative pattern of observers.
The subject were 86 boys and 72 girls, ranging in age from 10 years 5 months to 11 and half years, drown from 5 classes in 5th grade in a public primary school. Model was a 19 years old female undergraduate, and experimenter was a 23-year old male graduate.
So as to equalize the task abilities in each experimental and each control groups, the figurenumber substitution task was first administered to all subjects in classroom settings. Then, model and/or each subject was administered three trials of simple arithmetic calculation based upon figurenumber substitution (e. g. _??_) in a booklet. 18 calculation problems were printed, for each trials, Model and subject were given 50 sec. to resolve the problems and 30 sec. inter-trial intervals to rest and to evaluate one's performance. The self evaluation of each subject was measured on the 3 point-graphic scale (not enough, nough, highly enough) after each trial.
A 2×2×2×2 factorial design was employed. Half of the experimental children observed high performance model, and half were exposed to low performance model. In both conditions, half the children observed vicarious reward. While the remaining children in each group witnessed vicarious punishments. In addition, each group was further divided into external (reinforcement was administered by experimenter) or internal (model's self reinforcement) control condition.
In high performance condition, model performed 10 problems, and in low performance condition, model performed 6 or 7 problems in each trial. These scores were determined based upon the performance level of no-model control group (Mean=8.25, SD=1.87) of 39 subjects.
In reward condition, model or experimenter evaluated model's performance as highly enough, and in punishment condition, they devaluated model's performance as not enough.
The main results were p resented in FIG. 1. 2. 3. Analysis of variance performed on over-all self evaluation scores disclosed that highly significant effects were produced by the vicarious reward punishment (F=52.85, P<0.001), and not produced by the other variables. So, vicarious self reinforcement and vicarious external reinforcement were found to be equally efficacious in the modification of self evaluative behavior of observers.
Children who obsarved model's self punishment raised significantly their evaluation more affirmatively from first trial to third trial.(t=3.16, P<0.01) But children who observed model receive external punishment did not altered their evaluative standard. So we consider that there should be subtle but important differences between the informative functions of vicarious self reinforcement and vicarious external reinforcement. Vicarious self reinforcement may transmit the self-monitoring flexible self reinforcement pattern, while vicarious external reinforcement, may transmit other-oriented inflexible self reinforcement pattern.
Analysis of variance on performance scores revealed that any independent variables we introduced did not produce significant differences.

View full abstract

In their play, children often use some objects to designate and replace others. We call such use of objects “symbolic use”, the objects “signifiers” and the designated objects “signified”.
The purpose of the present study is to examine: (1) the role of play activities in symbolic use,(2) the developmental change of symbolic use.
64 nursery school children, aged from 3 to 6, took part in these three experiments.
Experiment I (outside of play 1)
8 objects are presented one by one and each S is asked whether the object (signifier) can be used or not as a certain suggested object (signified).
Experiment II (outside of play 2)
Each S is told a fairy tale and presented some figures (signifier) representing, in varying degrees of similarity, the characters (signified) in the story. The S is then asked to choose which figure he sees as representing the character in the story.
Experiment III (inside of play)
The same objects, as in the Experiment I, are presented in the role-taking-play whith a certain suggested theme. Each S is observed to see if he can actually use the object as a certain suggested object as in the Experiment I.
Comparing the results in the Experiment I and III, inside of play (Experiment III), we may infer that “symbolic use” is easier than outside of play (Experiment I).“Symbolic use” can be achieved inside of play so long as the objects can support the same activities as the signified objects, regardless of the dissimilarity of the object to the “signified”. Outside of play, however,“symbolic use” is more difficult, especially with objects which are distinctly different from that “signified”. These results suggest that actual symbolic use may facilitate symbolic function in children.
Concerning the development of symbolic use, cases inside of play are more observed in the older age group than in the younger, and cases outside of play are more often recorded in the younger than in the older age group. In the former type of “symbolic use”, the object and its “signified” are joined by play activities, regardless of the difference between them therefore, children in the older age group who have the former experience of play activities and play themes make this type of “symbolic use”, more readily than the younger. On the other hand, in the latter type of “symbolic use,” the object and its “signfied” are joined in their similarities. Then the older children who can discriminate strictly the difference between the two make this type less readily than the younger.
In conclusion, we may infer that among these two types of “symbolic use”,“symbolic use” inside of play might be the main road of development of symbolic function in children, leading to the level of “sign” where the “signifier” sharply differs from its “signified”.

View full abstract

[in Japanese]

View full abstract

[in Japanese]

View full abstract