Thirty young children with handicaps were assessed using a series of five self-recognition mirror tasks developed by Bertenthal and Fischer (1978a, 1978b). The task data were submitted to a Guttman Scalogram. Generally, the set of items did form a reproducible scale, indicating these tasks are an appropriate measure of self-recognition in young children with handicaps. However, some general differences were noted between task performance by this sample and those reported by the authors for nonhandicapped young children, particularly, results obtained on task 1 (tactual exploration of the mirror). A partial correlation technique, controlling for chronological age, indicated that stage of self-recognition is positively and significantly related to cognitive development or mental age. Possible explanations for the observed differences are presented, along with recommendations for future research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Amsterdam, B. (1972). Mirror self-image reactions before age two. Developmental Psychobiology, 5, 297–305.
2.
Bayley, N. (1969). Manual for the Bayley scales of infant development.San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corp.
3.
Bertenthal, B.I., & Fischer, K.W. (1978a). The development of self-recognition in the infant. Developmental Psychology, 14, 44–50.
4.
Bertenthal, B.I., & Fischer, K.W. (1978b). Scoring manual and theoretical derivation for “the development of self-recognition in the infant”. Unpublished manuscript, University of Denver, Cognitive Development Laboratory.
5.
Brassell, W.R., & Dunst, C.J. (1976). Comparison of two procedures for fostering the development of the object concept. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 80, 523–528.
6.
Dixon, J.C. (1957). Development of self-recognition. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 91, 251–256.
7.
Dunst, C.J. (1980). A clinical and education manual for use with the Uzgiris and Hunt Scales of Infant Psychological Development.Austin, TX: ProEd.
Dunst, C.J. (1982). The clinical utility of Piagetian-based scales of infant development. Infant Mental Health Journal, 3, 259–275.
10.
Dunst, C.J. (1984). Toward a social-ecological perspective of sensorimotor development among the mentally retarded. In P. Brooks, R. Sperber, & C. McCawley (Eds.), Learning and cognition in the mentally retarded (pp. 359–381). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11.
Dunst, C.J., Brassell, W.R., & Rheingrover, R.M. (1981). Structural and organizational features of sensorimotor intelligence among mentally retarded infants and toddlers. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 133–143.
12.
Dunst, C.J., & Gallagher, J.L. (1983). Piagetian approaches to infant assessment. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 3, 44–62.
13.
Dunst, C.J., Gallagher, J.L., & Vance, S.P. (1982, April). Developmental characteristics of sensorimotor intelligence among mentally retarded infants: Preliminary findings. Paper presented at a symposium entitled Contributions of a Piagetian Perspective to Research in Mental Retardation/Developmental Disabilities, Gatlinburg, TN.,
14.
Dunst, C.J., & Rheingrover, R.M. (1983). Structural characteristics of sensorimotor development among Down syndrome infants. Journal of Mental Deficiency Research, 27, 11–22.
15.
Dunst, C.J., Rheingrover, R.M., & Kistler, E.D. (in press). Concurrent validity of the Uzgiris-Hunt scales: Relationship to Bayley scale mental age. Exceptional People Quarterly.
16.
Escalona, S., & Corman, H. (1966). The Albert Einstein scales of sensorimotor development.New York: Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Department of Psychiatry.
Gallup, G.G. (1979). Self-recognition in chimpanzees and man: A developmental and comparative perspective. In M. Lewis, & L.A. Rosenblum (Eds.), The child and its family: Genesis of behavior (pp. 107–126). New York: Plenum Press.
19.
Gesell, A., & Ames, L.B. (1947). The infant's reaction to his mirror image. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 70, 141–154.
20.
Harris, L.P. (1977). Self-recognition among institutionalized profoundly retarded males: A replication. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 9, 43–44.
21.
Heffernan, L., & Black, F.W. (1984). Use of the Uzgiris and Hunt scales with handicapped infants: Concurrent validity of the Dunst age norms. Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 2, 159–168.
22.
Hill, S.D., & Tomlin, C. (1981). Self-recognition in retarded children. Child Development, 52, 145–150.
23.
Kahn, J.V. (1976). Utility of the Uzgiris and Hunt Scales of sensorimotor development with severely and profoundly retarded children. AAESPH Review, 3, 15–22.
24.
Kahn, J.V. (1978). Applications of the Piagetian literature to severely and profoundly retarded persons. Mental Retardation, 17, 273–280.
25.
Karlan, G.R. (1980). The effects of preference for objects and repeated measure upon the assessed level of object permanence in severely handicapped students. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 5, 174–193.
26.
Mans, L., Cicchetti, D., & Sroufe, L.A. (1978). Mirror reactions of Down syndrome infants and toddlers: Cognitive underpinnings of self-recognition. Child Development, 49, 1247–1250.
27.
Mehrabian, A., & Williams, M. (1971). Piagetian measures of cognitive development for children up to age two. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 1, 113–126.
28.
Mundy, P.C., Seibert, J.M., & Hogan, A.E. (1984). Relationship between sensorimotor and early communication abilities in developmentally delayed children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 20, 33–48.
29.
Neuman, C.J., & Hill, S.D. (1978). Self-recognition and stimulus preference in autistic children. Developmental Psychobiology, 11, 571–578.
30.
Nie, N., Hull, C.H., Jenkins, J.G., Steinbrenner, K., & Brent, D.H. (1975). Statistical package for the social sciences (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
31.
Papousek, H., & Papousek, M. (1974). Mirror image and self-recognition in young human infants: I. A new method of experimental analysis. Developmental Psychobiology, 7, 149–157.
32.
Pechacek, R.F., Bell, K.F., Cleland, C.C., Baum, C., & Boyle, M. (1973). Self-recognition in profoundly retarded males. Bulletin of Psychonomic Society, 1, 328–330.
33.
Rogers, S.J. (1977). Characteristics of the cognitive development of profoundly retarded children. Child Development, 48, 837–843.
34.
Rogers, S.J. (1988). Cognitive characteristics of handicapped children's play: A review. Journal of the Division for Early Childhood, 12, 161–168.
35.
Schulman, A.H., & Kaplowitz, C. (1977). Mirror-image responses during the first two years of life. Developmental Psychobiology, 10, 133–142.
36.
Seibert, J.M., Hogan, A.E., & Mundy, P.C. (1984). Mental age and cognitive stage in young handicapped and at-risk children. Intelligence, 8, 11–29.
37.
Sexton, D., Miller, J.H., Scott, R.L., & Rogers, C. (in press). Concurrent validity data for the Uzgiris and Hunt scales and the Bayley mental scale: Additional evidence on the Dunst age norms. Journal of the Division for Early Childhood.
38.
Sherrod, L.R., & Lamb, M.E. (1981). Infant social cognition: An introduction. In L.R. Sherrod & M.E. Lamb (Eds.), Infant social cognition (pp. 1–10). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
39.
Simeonsson, R.J., Huntington, G.S., & Parse, S.A. (1980). Assessment of children with severe handicaps: Multiple problems--multivariate goals. Journal of the Association for the Severely Handicapped, 5, 55–72.
40.
Switzky, H., Rotatori, A.F., Miller, T., & Freagon, S. (1979). The developmental model and its implications for assessment and instruction for the severely/profoundly handicapped. Mental Retardation, 17, 167–170.
41.
Terman, L.M., & Merrill, M.A. (1973). Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale: Manual for the Third Revision, Forms L-M.Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
42.
Uzgiris, I.C., & Hunt, J. McV. (1975). Assessment in infancy: Ordinal scales of psychological development.Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
43.
Wachs, T.D. (1970). Report on the utility of a Piaget-based infant scale with older retarded children. Developmental Psychology, 2, 449.
