In the assigned article, the primary focus of the study was to determine the relationship between object and belief, or the solidification of object permanence as it differs between infant to adult subjects. In short, children are incapable of understanding that objects are permanent and continue to exist even when they are not visible. The study then, asked the question, at what age do children begin to create a mechanism for object permanence, or do children have a notion of object permanence previous to 5 ½ months.
In order to answer this question, a group of 24 infants ranging from 4 months to 5 months were used, to target the behavior of infants between 4 ½ and 5 ½ months old. Children were then separated into a control and experiment groups, and tested via a visual interaction apparatus. In essence children were placed near a box, which produced a visual event, in order to test whether or not they understood that the visual event was inside the box, still, after it was closed. Two testing events were given, with the lid open to 112 and 180 degrees, respectively, with one considered impossible, and the other considered experimental. The experiment was controlled for habituation. The results indicated that the children did understand that the stimulus item continued to exist even when out of sight.
What occurs to me as a significant short coming, or limitation, of the study however, is their failure to use a real object of value. By using a person, or a toy that was known to the child as part of the stimulus, it would tell the researcher more about object permanence as it relates to recognition.
References:
The article you provided, publication details unknown.
