The DOI matches its Crossref record.
ORGANISMIC PROCESSES FOR NEO‐PIAGETIAN THEORIES: A DIALECTICAL CAUSAL ACCOUNT OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
Abstract
The paper criticizes some epistemological presuppositions of Piaget's and of neo‐Piagetian's work, in particular, the psycho‐Logical principle. This principle is contrasted with a more valid psycho‐dialectical one. It is suggested that a dialectical‐constructivist (i.e., causal‐dynamic) perspective offers a causal theoretical framework for cognitive development that is superior to that of Piaget and many neo‐Piagetians. I outline criteria for evaluating causal developmental theories, and point out deficiencies in Piaget's and neo‐Piagetian's stage theories vis‐à‐vis the criteria. An organismic theory of constructive operators ‐ a dialectical/causal theory ‐ is introduced as a remedy for these deficiencies. I focus on a modular model of mental attention that is constituted by four dynamically interacting functional systems. These systems together explain the ‘beam’ of mental attention and its phenomenological/behavioural effects. I claim that the stages of cognitive development are caused by growth of mental attention. The validity of this model is supported by data on a motor performance task (Rho task). The Rho data show: (a) the existence of stage‐wise plateaus in children's performance at ages congruent with the redefined Piagetian stages; (b) the psychological structures which, driven by mental attention (M‐capacity), are responsible for performance on the task, appear to be located in the left hemisphere of the brain. These findings, predicted by the dialectical theory of mental attention, highlight its causal‐predictive power.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
The magical number 4 in short-term memory: A reconsideration of mental storage capacity
Cowan, N. (2001) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x01003922 · Cited by 6,779
Training writing skills: a cognitive developmental perspective
Kellogg, R. T. (2008) · Journal of Writing Research · doi:10.17239/jowr-2008.01.01.1 · Cited by 868
Lane, R. D., Ryan, L., Nadel, L., & Greenberg, L. (2015) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x14000041 · Cited by 552
The origin of mind: Evolution of brain, cognition, and general intelligence.
Geary, D. C. (2005) · doi:10.1037/10871-000 · Cited by 551
Greenberg, L. S. (2004) · Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy · doi:10.1002/cpp.388 · Cited by 489
Metadata
- Authors
- Pascual‐Leone, J.
- Venue
- International Journal of Psychology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1987-10-12
- Volume
- 22
- Issue
- 5-6
- Pages
- 531-570
- ISSN
- 0020-7594 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-066X
- OpenAlex
- W2054378512
- Cited by
- 315
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 7.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: ORGANISMIC PROCESSES FOR NEO‐PIAGETIAN THEORIES: A DIALECTICAL CAUSAL ACCOUNT OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/00207598708246795
- The paper
- Pascual‐Leone, J. (1987). ORGANISMIC PROCESSES FOR NEO‐PIAGETIAN THEORIES: A DIALECTICAL CAUSAL ACCOUNT OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT. International Journal of Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207598708246795
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.