You are not currently logged in.
Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:
If You Use a Screen ReaderThis content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Note on Conservation: Methodological and Definitional Considerations
Gerald E. Gruen
Vol. 37, No. 4 (Dec., 1966), pp. 977-983
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1126619
Page Count: 7
You can always find the topics here!Topics: Child psychology, Children, Cognitive psychology, Conservation practices, Ambiguity
Were these topics helpful?See something inaccurate? Let us know!
Select the topics that are inaccurate.
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Preview not available
Differences in the procedures that Bruner and Smedslund have employed to study conservation are examined. Attention is focused primarily on the criteria that each has used to assess the presence or absence of conservation. Children's responses to the conservation question taken from a previous study were classified as conserving or nonconserving according to both Bruner's and Smedslund's procedures. Significantly more responses were classified as conserving when Bruner's criteria were used than when Smedslund's criteria were used. The differences in procedure and results are interpreted as reflecting a basic disagreement as to the nature of the psychological processes that underlie conservation.
Child Development © 1966 Society for Research in Child Development