Conservation and Compensation

Abstract

Abstract Piaget treats compensatory answers to the water jar problem by assuming that the child multiplies proportions in two dimensions (e.g., half the width by twice the height). Since the problem is three dimensional, a two dimensional analysis will not work to produce conservation. In an empirical test of related hypotheses using a prediction of height of water as an independent index of compensatory ability (N = 118 boys and girls from kindergarten through fifth grade), it was shown that many children compensate who do not conserve, a few children conserve who do not compensate, and conserving children who compensate incorrectly (as almost all do) will reject their compensation-based prediction in favor of the conservation judgment. It is concluded that while a loosely construed theory of compensation might help explain the development of conservation ability in the water jar problem, Piaget's tightly organized theory is at best questionable.