From Perception to Conception

  • Jean M. Mandler
Part of the Annals of Theoretical Psychology book series (AOTP, volume 10)


As I began to read George Butterworth’s chapter, I thought that surely we were going to disagree. He begins by espousing Gibson’s ‘direct realism’ theory of perception, a theory that I have not found to be particularly helpful in my quest to understand the conceptual foundations of the mind. But as he elaborated his understanding of this view, and contrasted it with the more traditional constructivist view of Piaget, I came to realize that despite differences in terminology our views of the perceptual foundations of knowledge are very similar. We agree on the import of recent work on infant perception, and that perceptual functioning forms the initial basis for gaining knowledge about the world. However, we seem to disagree on the extent to which Gibson’s theory is apt to provide a sufficient basis for understanding conceptual growth. I will first summarize our points of agreement, and then discuss the problems to which our common belief in the perceptual foundations of knowledge lead us.


Young Infant Conceptual Knowledge Perceptual System Perceptual Categorization Perceptual Information 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Baillargeon, R. (1993). The object concept revisited: New directions in the investigation of infents’ physical knowledge. In C. Granrud (Ed.), Visual perception and cognition in infancy. Hillsdale, NJ: ErlbaumGoogle Scholar
  2. Banks, M. S. & Salapatek, P. (1983). Infant visual perception. In M. M. Haith & J. J. Campos (Eds.), Infancy and developmental psychobiology (pp. 435–571), Vol. 2. of P. H. Mussen (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  3. Bertenthal, B. (1992). Infents’ perception of biomechanical motions: Intrinsic image and knowledge-based constraints. In C. Granrud (Ed.), Visual perception and cognition in infancy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Choi, S. & Bowerman, M. (1992). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 41, 83–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diamond, A. (1985). Development of the ability to use recall to guide action, as indicated by infents’ performance on AB. Child Development, 56, 868–883.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fagan, J. F., III, & Singer, L. T. (1979). The role of simple feature differences in infants’ recognition of feces. Infant Behavior & Development, 2, 39–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fantz, R. L., & Miranda, S. B. (1975). New born infant attention to form of contour. Child Development, 46, 224–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fox, N., Kagan, J., & Weiskopf, S. (1979). The growth of memory during infancy. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 99, 91–130.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Freeman, N. H., Lloyd, S., & Sinha, C. G. (1980). Infant search tasks reveal early concepts of containment and canonical usage of objects. Cognition, 8, 243–262.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson, E. J., & Spelke, E. S. (1983). The development of perceptioa In J. H. Flavell & E. M. Markman (Eds.), Cognitive Development (pp. 1–76), Vol. 3 of P. Mussen (Ed.), Manual of child psychology. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  11. Gibson, E. J., & Walker, A. S. (1984). Development of knowledge of visual-tactual affordances of substance. Child Development, 55, 453–460.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harris, P. L., Cassel, T. Z., & Bamborough, P. (1974). Tracking by young infants. British Journal of Psychology, 65, 345–349.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hofsten, C., von (1982). Eye-hand coordination in the newborn. Developmental Psychology, 18, 450–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hofsten, C., von, & Lindhagen, K. (1979). Observations on the development of reaching for moving objects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 28, 158–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Holt.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Janowsky, J. S. (1985). Cognitive development and reorganization after early brain injury. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University.Google Scholar
  17. Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  18. Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1986). From meta-processes to conscious access: Evidence from children’s metalinguistic and repair data. Cognition, 23, 95–147.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kellman, P. J. (1988). Theories of perception and research in perceptual development. In A. Yonas (Ed.), Perceptual development in infancy (pp. 267–281). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  20. Kellman, P.J. (1993). Kinematic foundations of infant visual perceptioa In C.E. Granrud (Ed.), Visual perception and cognition in infancy. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  21. Kolstad, V.T. (1991), April). Understanding of containment in 5.5-month-old infants. Poster presented at the meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
  22. Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mandler, G. (1989). Memory: Conscious and unconscious. In P. R. Soloman, G. R. Goethals, C. M. Kelley, & B. R. Stephens (Eds.), Memory: Interdisciplinary approaches. New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
  24. Mandler, J. M. (1988). How to build a baby: On the development of an accessible representational system. Cognitive Development, 3, 113–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Mandler, J.M. (1992). How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review, 99, 587–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mandler, J.M. (in press). Precursors of linguistic knowledge. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, B. Google Scholar
  27. Mandler, J.M. & McDonough, L. (1993). Concept formation in infancy. Cognitive Development, 8, 291–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Meltzoff, A. N., & Borton, R. W. (1979). Intermodal matching by human neonates. Nature, 282, 403–404.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Piaget, J. (1951). Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  30. Quinn, P. C., Eimas, P. D. (1986). On categorization in early infancy. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 32, 331–363.Google Scholar
  31. Quinn, P.C., Eimas, P.D., & Rosenkrantz, S.L. (1993). Evidence for representations of perceptually similar natural categories by 3-month-old and 4-month-old infants. Perception, 22, 463–475.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Ruff, H. A. (1986). Components of attention during infants’ manipulative explo-ratioa Child Development, 57, 105–114.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rumelhart, D. E., McClelland, J. L., & the PDP Research Group. (1986). Parallel distributed processing: Explorations in the microstructure of cognition, Vol. 1. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Spelke, E. S. (1976).Infants’ intermodal perception of events. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 626–636.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Spelke, E. S. (1985). Preferential-looking methods as tools for the study of cognition in infancy. In G. Gottlieb & N. Krasnegor (Eds.), Measurement of audition and vision in the first year of postnatal life (pp. 323–363). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  36. Spelke, E. S. (1988). Where perceiving ends and thinking begins: The apprehension of objects in infancy. In A. Yonas (Ed.), Perceptual development in infancy (pp. 197–234). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  37. Thelan, E. & Smith, L.B. (in press). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  38. Werner, H., & Kaplan, B. (1963). Symbol formation. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean M. Mandler
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cognitive ScienceUniversity of CaliforniaSan Diego, La JollaUSA

Personalised recommendations