ABSTRACT
Manipulation of three-dimensional objects affords children learning opportunities that are
less available in situations that involve purely verbal or written communication (Rogoff,
1990). As discussed in other chapters in this volume, and in the education literature more
broadly, the opportunity to touch and interact with objects is often very helpful for young
children as they attempt to understand abstract concepts or processes. Inspired by Piaget’s
theory (cf. Piaget & Inhelder, 1969), psychologists and education researchers have
posited various concrete-to-abstract shifts in children’s thinking. For example, whereas
preschool-aged children understand perceptually based analogies, older children
understand analogies based on more abstract relational features (Kotovsky & Gentner,
1996). Educational methods have often been developed with such concrete-abstract shifts
in mind. The manipulative materials used in early mathematics classrooms, for example,
have long been considered essential aids in communicating abstract principles to young
children. The usefulness of concrete objects as tools for abstract thought is not surprising,
given young children’s connection to the sensory reality of the here-and-now. In this
chapter, however, we focus on a growing view that concrete objects do not always
improve children’s understanding of abstract ideas, and, in fact, that the sensory
properties of certain objects, “representational objects,” can even pose an obstacle to
learning (Uttal, Liu, & DeLoache, 1999).
