A secret agent? How infants learn about the identity of objects in a causal scene

Make the first move: How infants learn about self-propelled objects.

“…Second, they were devised to investigate the developmental trajectory involved in infants' learning about the features that are typical of self-propelled objects. Of particular relevance was whether infants undergo a similar developmental course when they learn about objects' onset of motion as when they learn about their causal role in an event (Rakison, 2005); that is, a key question was whether infants will initially learn relations that are inconsistent with those in the real world and then later be more selective in the relations to which they will attend. These issues were addressed by showing 16-, 18-, and 20-month-olds noncausal events with novel geometric figures in which one object moved without physical contact from another object.…”

“…An important question that needs to be addressed is why infants might develop knowledge about self-propelled objects later in development than they learn about agents and recipients of a causal action (Rakison, 2005). One feasible possibility is that infants are exposed to more causal events than self-propelled ones.…”

“…Recall that Rakison (2005) found that by 16 months of age, infants have learned that agents possess dynamic parts and recipients possess static parts. One explanation, then, of the 18-month-olds' behavior is that they overgeneralized this principle-that the first object should possess a dynamic part and the second object should possess a static part-to the noncausal habituation and test events used here.…”

“…The parent was instructed to remain neutral, not to interact with the infant verbally or otherwise, and to focus his or her gaze above the computer screen. This procedure with parents has been used in previous studies with the habituation procedure (e.g., Rakison, 2004Rakison, , 2005Rakison & Poulin-Dubois, 2002), and it is preferable to using a blindfold or sunglasses because the parent can monitor and pacify a potentially fussy infant. Note also that parents were given no information about the hypotheses and predictions of the experiments prior to testing.…”

A computer touch screen system and training procedure for use with primate infants: Results from pigtail monkeys (Macaca nemestrina)

“…Computer-based testing is also on the rise in developmental research, especially in electrophysiology and neural imaging studies where they are used to present stimuli with high levels of replicable precision. Computers are also used in infant studies of object perception (e.g., Rakison, 2005), object concept formation (e.g., Kaufman, Csibra, & Johnson, 2005), categorization (e.g., Horst, Oakes, & Madole, 2005), recognition memory (e.g., Richards, 2003) and face perception (e.g., deHaan, Pascalis, & Johnson, 2002) to name a few. They are also being used to administer neuropsychological batteries to school-aged children that assess memory, executive functioning and spatial ability (e.g., Brophy, Taylor, & Hughes, 2002;Luciana & Nelson, 2002).…”