This article was downloaded by: [University of North Carolina]On: 07 October 2014, At: 11:03Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Journal of Genetic Psychology:Research and Theory on HumanDevelopmentPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vgnt20

Role-Taking Skills and ClassificationAbilities in Children in IndiaKaruna Behl a b & Hugh Gash a ba Education Department , St. Patrick's College , Dublin , Irelandb St. Patrick's College , Dublin 9 , IrelandPublished online: 20 Sep 2012.

To cite this article: Karuna Behl & Hugh Gash (1980) Role-Taking Skills and Classification Abilities inChildren in India, The Journal of Genetic Psychology: Research and Theory on Human Development,136:2, 265-274, DOI: 10.1080/00221325.1980.10534120

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00221325.1980.10534120

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

The J o u d of Genetic Psychology, 1980, 136,265-274.

ROLE-TAKING SKILLS AND CLASSIFICATION ABILITIES IN CHILDREN IN INDIA*’

New Delhi, India; and Education Department, St. Patrick’s College, Dublin, Ireland

KARUNA BEHL AND HUGH GASH

SUMMARY Nine measures of role-taking in the tradition of Flavell and two measures

of classification were administered to 64 boys and girls in India in four age groups: 6-7, 7-8, 8-9, and 9-10 years. The results lend cross-cultural support to the hypothesis that certain classification skills underlie this type of role- taking ability. The inappropriateness of searching for developmental re- lationships with some parametric statistics was also demonstrated with these data. The influence of two types of role-taking question on role-taking ability was also assessed. Role-taking questions were asked after the Ss had seen a cartoon sequence. On one type of role-taking question (a “next” question) Ss were asked how another child would think the cartoon ended if shown only the beginning. On the other type of role-taking question (a “before” question) Ss were asked how another child would think the cartoon began when shown only the end. Cartoon content was shown to influence role-taking ability in response to “next” questions.

A. INTRODUCTION Gash and Smock (7) report an apparent developmental sequence: class

inclusion then a form of role-taking. Cartoon tasks were used to assess role- taking in the tradition of Flavell ( 5 , task ID). This type of task assesses a child’s ability to distinguish between (a) personal knowledge of a cartoon sequence and (b) the different understanding of another child who sees only part of the same sequence. Decentered responses to such problems require

* Received in the Editorial Office, Provincetown, Massachusetts, on January 11, 1979. Copyright, 1980, by The Journal Press.

This paper is based on an unpublished Master’s thesis submitted to Lady Irwin College, New Delhi, India, by the first author under the guidance of Miss Anupama Rao. The thesis was based on a paper presented by the second author at the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development in Denver, Colorado, April, 1975. Requests for reprints should be sent to the second author at the address shown at the end of this article.

265

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

2 66 JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

the ability to construct a plausible alternative meaning for that part of the sequence which the other does not see but is asked to interpret. This decen- tered response, therefore, requires the ability to coordinate separate interpre- tations of part of the cartoon. In an apparently analogous manner, class inclusion problems require coordination of parts of a whole. On the basis of this analogy Gash and Smock (7) investigated the relation between class inclusion and this form of role-taking and found a sequence both within and across grade levels: class inclusion then role-taking. A measure of multiple classification was also used because at the time it seemed less similar to the operations needed for this type of role-taking, and no developmental se- quence was found for these measures within grade level though there was a developmental sequence across grade levels (7). The first purpose of the present study is to investigate the generality of this result by replicating the study in a different cultural context in India. The Ss in this study all speak Hindi, an Indo-European language in which the relation between the sur- face structure and the underlying cognitive operations is different from English (1). The replication of a sequence for class inclusion and role-taking in children in whom there are different structural associations between the underlying cognitive operations and surface language lends support to the developmental significance of this sequence.

A number of prior studies on the intersection of structural developmental changes in children’s understandings of their physical and social worlds (4, 8, 9, 10, 12) sought associations rather than sequences and quantified mea- sures in a manner Wohlwill (14) has argued is likely to obscure relations between structural variables of this type. In this paper structural analyses will be used because of the qualitative nature of the classification and role- taking skills measured: For comparative reasons a quantitative analysis will also be performed.

The second purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of the form of the role-taking question on the expression of that ability. Role-taking with this type of cartoon task involves at least two types of mental operation. First, the S must be aware that the other person does not know the whole story. Second, the S must construct a novel meaning for part of the cartoon. Gash and Smock (7) thought that the manner in which role-taking questions were often asked (“before” questions) required Ss to engage in an activity inconsistent with cartoon interpretation: namely, imagining how the begin- ning of the cartoon might have been different. In contrast, if Ss were asked how another might anticipate the ending when shown the beginning (a %ext” question), they would think in a manner similar to that required in the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

KARUNA BEHL AND HUGH GASH 267

interpretation of any cartoon. During cartoon interpretation alternative pos- sible endings may have occurred to the S . Such possibilities would be avail- able to the S as plausible alternative meanings for the other whose role has to be taken. For this reason Gash and Smock (7) thought that “next” questions would be easier than “before” questions, and their results showed that tran- sitional S s (who were neither wholly decentered nor egocentric) were significantly more likely to be decentered on “next” questions and egocentric on “before” questions than vice versa. While this result held over all four cartoons used in that study, closer inspection of the data revealed that this result derived from two of the cartoons. The second major purpose of this study, therefore, is to assess the facilitatory effect of “next” questions with the use of different cartoons so that the plausible alternative interpretations, for the other child, are vaned.

B. METHOD

1. Subjects The Ss were 64 middle-class Indian (Asian) children randomly selected

from the classes of a boys’ school and a girls’ school under the restriction that there be four age groups. There were eight boys and eight girls in each of the age groups; 6-7 years, 7-8 years, 8-9 years, and 9-10 years. All Ss spoke Hindi and English.

2 . Materials a. Classi$cation tasks. There were two classification measures: a task

used by Smedslund (1 1) to measure class inclusion, and the Nixon classifica- tion task, described in de Lacey (3), used to measure multiplicative (two- way) classification. On both tasks Ss were categorized as either preopera- tional or operational. In the version of the Smedslund task used here, triangles were substituted for squares, and squares for circles. The task requires Ss to understand that while there are more square pieces (ten) than triangular pieces (three), there are more red pieces (all are red) than square pieces. On this task, operational Ss were those who said that there were more red pieces than square pieces and were able to justify their response adequately, for example, by saying that this was because all the pieces were red or because there were red squares and red triangles. Otherwise responses were considered preoperational.

The Nixon task consisted of five sets of four wooden cylinders differing in height, color, and width. There were four cylinders of each color (red,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

2 68 JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

yellow, white, green, and blue); a tall thin, a tall fat, a short thin, and a short fat. Ss were shown how the cylinders could be classified on each dimension. Then six problems were presented requiring a reclassification of the cylin- ders. On item 1 for example the S was presented with the red cylinders together and the white cylinders together and was required to reclassify them on the dimension height. S s were classified operational if they correctly regrouped the wooden cylinders for at least five of the six items on the test on their first attempt and justified this regrouping by reference to the appropri- ate dimension (height, color, or width). Otherwise Ss were categorized as preoperational on this task.

Six cartoons were used to assess role-taking skills. In as- sessing role-taking ability, S s first described the entire sequence in each cartoon. Then they were asked to say how another child (friend) would interpret the cartoon when this other child does not know about part of the cartoon sequence. Decentered responses were those in which the S indicated that the other child would not know about that part of the sequence which he was not shown. Egocentric responses were those which referred to infor- mation privileged to the S who saw the entire sequence. The types of event portrayed in the cartoons constrain the form of role-taking question (“next” a n d o r “before”) which may be asked.

On the first cartoon the sequence shows a boy and a girl trying to pick an apple from a tree, but the tree is too high. Then a giraffe appears and picks the apple for the children. The role-taking question (a “next” question) was asked when the giraffe pictures were removed and involved asking the S how he thought his friend might think the boy and girl got the apple from the tree. The second task was based on the lost coin story used by Chandler and Greenspan (2) . In this cartoon a little girl plays with a coin and loses it in a drain, then a little boy arrives and is puzzled by the girl’s sadness. On this item Ss were asked what a friend would think was going to happen if he was shown only the first picture of the girl playing with her coin (a “next” question). In addition to this item Ss were asked how a friend would say that the little boy would interpret the girl’s sadness-a “before” question, since the coin was lost before he arrived. The third cartoon depicts a group of boys in sports clothes who are making fun of one boy who is walking past with books under his arm. This boy is then shown training on his own. On sports day when all the boys have a race he defeats the boys who were teasing him. In asking the role-taking question the pictures of the boy practising alone were removed and the S was asked who his friend would think would win

b. Cartoons.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

KARUNA BEHL AND HUGH GASH 269

the race (a “next” question). The fourth cartoon was based on the sequence described in Flavell(5) in which a dog chases a boy up an apple tree, and the boy eats an apple. The role-taking question (a “before” question) was asked when the pictures of the dog were removed and the S was asked why a friend would think the boy has climbed the tree. The fifth cartoon depicts a boy watching a monkey throwing a jar onto the ground. Then the monkey leaves and the boy’s mother enters, sees the broken jar, and slaps the boy. On the next question the S was asked how his friend would think the cartoon ended if he was shown only the pictures showing the story up to where the monkey throws the jar onto the ground. On the “before?’ question the S was shown only the picture of the mother slapping the boy and was asked what his friend would say if asked what happened before this. The sixth cartoon shows two boys who are standing at the corner of a house, see a girl ap- proaching, and plan to spray her with water. They go and fill their spray guns and hide behind the house waiting for the girl to appear. When the girl does not appear, they peep around the corner of the house, but she is nowhere in sight. Then they look up and see that she is on the balcony above them with a bucket of water which she throws over them. On the “next” question the S was shown the sequence up to the point where the boys fill their spray guns and hide. The S was then asked what his friend would think was going to happen. On the “before” question the last picture (showing only two wet boys) was presented and the S was asked how his friend might think the boys got wet.

S s with six or more decentered responses to the nine role-taking questions were considered decentered: Ss with less than six decentered responses were considered egocentric. This categorization reflected that used in the Gash and Smock (7) study where seven decentered responses to 11 role-taking questions were required for an S to be considered decentered. In that study the seven to 11 ratio was arrived at empirically on the grounds that it gave approximately comparable percentages of S s who were decentered on role- taking and operational on classification.

3. Procedure The 64 Ss were tested individually by the first author. Testing lasted

approximately 20 minutes. The classification tasks and the role-taking tasks were administered in the order in which they are described in the previous section of this paper, since no order effects were found for these types of tasks in Gash and Smock (7) or in Gash (6). Sixty Ss were tested in English D

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Nor

th C

arol

ina]

at 1

1:03

07

Oct

ober

201

4

2 70 JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

and four in Hindi. The role-taking protocols were scored by the first author. Two raters independently scored 2 1 protocols, and there was 99% agreement between the two sets of scores. Disagreements were resolved in discussion.

C. RESULTS

1. Nonnative Aspects of the Data The consistency of the measures of role-taking was assessed by contrasting

the responses (egocentric and decentered) to each pair of role-taking ques- tions for a total of 36 contrasts, and x' values were calculated. Twenty-two of these values were significant at the .01 level and a further eight were significant a t the .05 level, indicating substantial consistency; in each of the six remaining cases at least 40% of Ss responded egocentrically to both role-taking questions.

Thirty-four Ss were operational on the Nixon classification task, 29 Ss were operational on the Smedslund, and 17 Ss were decentered on the role-taking measures: Numbers of S s at each age level who were operational and decentered may be inferred from Table 1.

2 . Relation Between Classification and Role-Taking From a developmental point of view it is the transitional Ss who are of

great interest in the two by two matrices contrasting types of response (egocentric and decentered) to the role-taking and the classification tasks: Transitional Ss being those who are egocentric on either the role-taking or classification task and decentered on the other task. The McNemar test of

TABLE 1 RELATION BETWEEN ROLE-TAKING SKILLS AND

(Numbers of Ss in cells) CLASSIFICATION ABILITY BY AGE

Age Classification 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 Total task E D E D E D E D E D

Smedslund task Preoperational 11 2 9 0 5 1 5 2 3 0 5 Operational 2 1 5 2 6 4 4 5 17 12

Preoperational 9 2 4 1 5 2 6 1 24 6 Operational 4 1 1 0 1 6 3 3 6 2 3 1 1

Nixon task

Note: E = egocentric across role-taking tasks; D = decentered across role-taking tasks.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

KARUNA BEHL AND HUGH GASH 2 7 1

the.significance of change was used to test the hypothesis that there would be more Ss who were operational on classification tasks and egocentric on role-taking tasks than Ss who were preoperational on classification and decentered on role-taking.

The patterns of interrelation between classification and role-taking may be seen in Table 1 both across and within age levels. McNemar tests of the significance of change applied to numbers of transitional S s considered across age levels showed, as hypothesized, that Ss were significantly more likely to be operational on classification and egocentric on role-taking than vice versa for the Smedslund task (x2 = 6.0, p C .01, one-tailed), and the Nixon task (x2 = 8.83, p < .005, one-tailed). The same trend can be seen in Table 1 within each age level on each classification measure.

To demonstrate the way in which parametric statistics can obscure devel- opmental relationships by ignoring qualitative aspects of the measures the relation between role-taking and classification was also assessed with the use of t tests. Mean numbers of decentered responses on role-taking tasks were compared for preoperational and operational groups on each classification measure. For this analysis decentered responses received a score of three, egocentric responses received a score of one, and egocentric responses which made only indirect reference to privileged information received a score of two. There were no significant differences between mean role-taking scores for preoperational and operational Ss in the case of either the Smedslund task (X = 13.4 and 18.1, respectively) or the Nixon task (X = 14.7 and 15.9, respectively).

3. meet of Cartoon Content and Type of Question on Decentering The patterns of response for “next” and “before” questions on the three

cartoons concerned (two, five, and six) are shown in Table 2 . On cartoon

TABLE 2 INFLUENCE OF QUESTION TYPE ON ROLE-TAKING

(Numbers of Ss in cells) - “Next” question response

“Before” question Cartoon 2 Cartoon 5 Cartoon 6 response E D E D E D

Egocentric 38 4 34 1 37 10 Decentered 9 13 20 9 3 14

Note: E = egocentric on “next” question after cartoon 2; D = decentered on “next” question after cartoon 2 .

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

2 7 2 JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

two, again with the use of the McNemar test for the significance of change, there was not a significant difference in the pattern obtained by transitional S s who were decentered on the “next” question and egocentric on the “be- fore” question. On cartoon six there were significantly more transitional Ss who were decentered on the “next” question and egocentric on the “before” question than vice versa ( x 2 = 2 . 7 7 , p < .05, one-tailed). On cartoon five there was a significant difference in the pattern obtained for transitional Ss, but in an unexpected direction ( x 2 = 15.41, p < .001).

D. DISCUSSION The results of the data analysis provide additional support for the devel-

opmental priority of certain classification skills to the ability to role-take with this type of task. This was the case for both the measure of class inclusion and of class multiplication. In the American study (7 ) this result held for only the measure of class inclusion. Hollos (8) argued that her analysis implied that role-taking structures may be more conceptually sepa- rate. However her analysis was not designed to reveal developmental se- quences. This study and the Gash and Smock study are consistent with the view that the mental operations underlying certain classification skills are necessary to the development of role-taking skills assessed by these cartoon tasks. I t is possible that the classification measures are merely simpler than the role-taking measures and that no necessary sequence is entailed. An appropriately conducted training study is necessary to see whether a devel- opmental sequence is to be inferred from these data. Such a study would need to train some Ss in classification, others in role-taking, and then care- fully study the consequences of such training on the skill which was not trained.

Gash (6) has reported that training in role-taking significantly increased class inclusion skills. I t is argued from this that role-taking includes the mental operations necessary for class inclusion.

I t may be speculated that the mental operations common to class inclusion and role-taking are those which coordinate, separate, and combine elements without violating the identity of the elements. It is difficult to interpret the significance of the sequence found in India for multiple classification and role-taking; it should be possible to assess its significance in a study which trains for both multiple classification and role-taking .

Wohlwill’s (14) caution against quantifying qualitative data is shown to indicate a real difficulty with these data. A quantitative analysis of mean D

ownl

oade

d by

[U

nive

rsity

of

Nor

th C

arol

ina]

at 1

1:03

07

Oct

ober

201

4

KARUNA BEHL AND HUGH GASH 2 73

scores derived from the cartoon tasks for preoperational and operational Ss on each classification task did not indicate the presence of a relationship between classification and role-taking. When role-taking ability is quantified, it becomes impossible to speak of the presence or absence of the cognitive operations necessary to role-taking. In this experiment the relation between role-taking abilities and classification skills was obscured. The strength of the techniques used in this present paper would appear to lie in the opportunity they provide to look closely at transitional Ss both within and across age levels, an opportunity eradicated when the data are quantified and analyzed with the use of means.

The analysis of the second major question in this study showed that all “next” questions do not facilitate role-taking ability. “Next” questions are asked in the context of the pictures from the beginning of the sequence. It is now apparent that there are three possible types of contextual effect all depending on the possible interpretations of the cartoon sequence. Three types of possible interpretations are envisioned. First, an event may seem likely and not happen in the cartoon sequence. Cartoon six is an example of this; little boys who wait for girls with water hoses can be expected to try to dowse their intended victims with water. This expectancy facilitated a de- centered response to the “next” question because in the story, and so in the S’s interpretation of the sequence, the girl is not drenched. Additional exam- ples of this type of facilitation are reported in Gash (6) where strong support is presented for the overall empirical consistency of both types (“next” and “before”) of role-taking question.

Second, an event may seem likely which does happen in the sequence. Cartoons two and five are examples of this. The “next” question on cartoon five was asked in the context of a picture of a boy and a broken jar. There is reasonable probability that the boy will be punished for the event. This is what happened in the story and there was a correspondingly significant increase in the number of transitional S s responding egocentrically to this role-taking question. The “next” question on cartoon two was asked with Chandler’s picture of the little girl playing with a coin near a drain. In this case it is possible that the little girl may lose the coin in the drain, a possibil- ity actualized in the cartoon, and this possibility apparently influenced the pattern for transitional Ss. This last influence was not significant though it should be noted that this type of analysis of pattern only looks at transitional Ss of whom there were only 13 in the case of cartoon two.

Third, the “next” question may be asked in the context of pictures which Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014

2 74 JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY

offer no clue as to what may happen. Gash (6) has shown that in this case the “next” question is easier than the “before” question, a finding which suggests that “next” questions per se facilitate decentering.

In conclusion, a recent paper by Urberg and Docherty (13) has shown that role-taking ability can be any one of a variety of skills with underlying cognitive operations of different complexity. This present study is one of a series demonstrating the influence of cartoon content on the expression of role-taking ability by Ss who are neither wholly egocentric nor wholly decen- tered on role-taking with this type of task. Further, the relation demon- strated between classification and role-taking may be interpreted as provid- ing cross-cultural support for a developmental sequence.

REFERENCES 1. BENDIX, E. H. Componential Analysis of General Vocabulary: The Semantic Structure of

a Set of Verbs in English, Hindi, and Japanese. The Hague, The Netherlands: Mouton, 1966.

CHANDLER, M. J . , & GREENSPAN, S. Ersatz egocentrism: A reply to H . Borke. Devel. Psychol., 1972, 7, 104-106.

DE LACEY, P. R. A relationship between classificatory ability and verbal intelligence. Internat. 1. Psychol., 1972, 7, 243-246.

FEFFER, M. H . , & GOUREVITCH, V. Cognitive aspects of role-taking in children. 1. Personal., 1960, 28, 383-396.

FLAVELL, J. H . The Development of Role-Taking and Communication Skills in Children. New York: Wiley, 1968.

GASH, H. Cognitive operations in role-taking and class inclusion. Unpublished manu- script, St. Patrick’s College, Dublin, Ireland, 1978.

GASH, H . , & SMOCK, C. D. Development of Social Relations: Role-taking Skills and Classification Abilities. J . Genet. Psychol., 1979, 135, 115-127.

HOLLOS, M. Logical operations and role-taking abilities in two cultures: Norway and Hungary. Child Devel . , 1975, 46, 638-650.

HOLLOS, M., & COWAN, P. A. Social isolation and cognitive development: Logical opera- tions and role-taking abilities in three Norwegian social settings. Child Devel . , 1973, 44, 630-641.

RUBIN, K. H. Egocentrism in childhood: A unitary construct? Child Devel., 1973, 44, 102-1 10.

SMEDSLUND, J. Concrete reasoning: A study of intellectual development. Monog. Soc. for Res. in Child Devel . , 1964, 29(2), Serial No. 93.

SULLIVAN, E. V., & HUNT, D. E . Interpersonal and objective decentering as a function of age and social class. J . Genet. Psychol., 1967, 110, 199-210.

URBERG, K. A., & DOCHERTY, E. M. Development of role-taking skills in young children. Devel. Psychol. ~ 1976, 12, 198-203.

WOHLWILL, J. F. The Study of Behavioral Development. New York: Academic Press,

2 .

3 .

4 .

5 .

6 .

7 .

8.

9.

10.

11.

12 .

13.

14.

S t . Patrick’s College Dublin 9, Ireland

1973.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 11:

03 0

7 O

ctob

er 2

014