Baillargeon's research significantly enhances our understanding of cognitive development in infants, particularly in the first year of life. Prior to her studies, it was widely believed that young infants had a limited understanding of the physical world. Baillargeon challenged this by demonstrating that even very young infants have an innate understanding of certain physical laws, such as object permanence and the concept of solidity. For example, her studies showed that infants as young as three months old expect objects to be solid and continuous, indicating a more advanced cognitive processing ability than previously thought. This research implies that cognitive development starts much earlier and progresses more rapidly than traditional theories, like Piaget’s, had suggested. It also points to the presence of innate cognitive abilities, suggesting that some aspects of our understanding of the physical world might be hardwired into the brain from birth, rather than being learned through experience alone.

Baillargeon's findings present a significant challenge to Piaget's theory of cognitive development, particularly regarding his stages of sensorimotor development. Piaget proposed that infants only develop the concept of object permanence at around eight months old, during the sensorimotor stage. However, Baillargeon's research indicates that infants as young as three months have some understanding of this concept. Her experiments, such as the 'Rotating Drawbridge' and 'Car and Tunnel' studies, demonstrated that infants showed surprise when presented with scenarios that violated basic physical principles, suggesting an early understanding of object permanence and continuity. These findings imply that cognitive abilities emerge much earlier than Piaget theorized and that infants have innate cognitive capacities. This challenges the view of a gradual, stage-like progression of cognitive skills, suggesting instead that infants are born with a more sophisticated set of cognitive tools than previously recognized.

Baillargeon's research has profound implications for early childhood education. By demonstrating that infants possess a more advanced understanding of the physical world than previously believed, her work suggests that educational approaches can be adapted to harness these early cognitive abilities. For instance, learning activities and materials can be designed to engage infants in ways that stimulate and build upon their innate understanding of object permanence, solidity, and continuity. This could involve more interactive and exploratory play, where infants are encouraged to manipulate objects to understand their properties better. Furthermore, Baillargeon's findings highlight the importance of providing rich, stimulating environments from a very young age, as infants are cognitively equipped to engage with and learn from their surroundings. This research underscores the need to reconsider the timing and methods of cognitive stimulation in early childhood, recognizing the potential for fostering cognitive development much earlier than previously thought.

Baillargeon's studies have been instrumental in the debate over innate versus learned aspects of cognition in infants. Her findings suggest that certain cognitive abilities, specifically those related to understanding the physical properties of objects, may be innate rather than entirely learned through experience. The fact that very young infants show surprise when confronted with physically impossible scenarios implies that they have some pre-existing knowledge or expectation about how objects should behave. This challenges the notion that all cognitive abilities are developed through interaction with the environment and learned through experience. Instead, Baillargeon's research supports the idea that infants are born with a foundational level of cognitive understanding, particularly concerning physical principles. This innate cognitive framework may then be built upon and refined through experiences and interactions with the world.

One of the main methodological challenges in Baillargeon's research is the interpretation of infants' looking times as indicators of cognitive processing. Critics argue that longer looking times could be attributed to factors other than cognitive surprise, such as novelty or perceptual interest. To address these concerns, Baillargeon and other researchers have conducted controlled experiments where infants are shown both 'possible' and 'impossible' scenarios. By comparing infants' reactions to these different scenarios, researchers can more confidently attribute longer looking times to cognitive surprise rather than to other factors. Additionally, subsequent studies have used variations of the violation of expectation method, incorporating additional controls and measures, such as heart rate monitoring and eye tracking, to strengthen the interpretation of the results. These methodological enhancements help to validate the conclusion that infants have more advanced cognitive abilities than previously assumed.