Motion Popout in Selective Visual Orienting at 4.5 But Not at 2 Months in Human Infants

Abstract

The effect of element density on selective orienting was examined in 2 experiments with 2‐ and 4.5‐month‐old infants. Selective visual orienting to a singleton oscillating target that appeared with other static bars was used to study the effects of element density. Increasing the set size and density of the static bars decreased selective orienting to the moving target in the 2‐month‐old infants, but it increased selective orienting in the 4.5‐month‐olds despite the fact that the overall levels of correct orienting to the target were titrated to be the same at the 2 ages. Thus, density affected the selectivity of visual orienting to movement at these 2 ages differently with popout being evident at the older age. In the 2nd experiment, motion popout for the 4.5‐month‐old infants was replicated using oscillating targets that had the same peak and mean speeds but different temporal frequencies and amplitudes of oscillation. Increases in the efficiency of perceptual grouping of similar elements between 2 and 4.5 months of age could overcome the lateral masking effects of increasing element density seen at the lower end of this age range.

Visual search and attention to faces during early infancy

“…We selected the 3–9 month age range to span the developmental changes in attentional abilities and face representation explored in the previous work in this literature (Amso & Johnson 2006, Amso Johnson 2008; DeNicola et al, 2013; Frank et al, 2009). Consistent with previous work, we predicted developmental increases in looking at faces (Frank et al, 2009) and increases in orienting to targets in the search displays (Dannemiller 2000, Dannemiller 2005). While both of these sets of tasks have been used in isolation, to our knowledge no previous study has examined the relation between them.…”

“…Prior work led us to believe that search abilities might be important for very young infants’ social attention: Infants in the 2 – 4 month range show substantial individual and developmental variation in search ability (Amso & Johnson 2006; Dannemiller 2005), and salient distractor stimuli differentially attract attention at this age (Frank et al, 2009). Nevertheless, the lack of other attentional measures constitutes a significant limitation of our design.…”

“…There is growing evidence that these motoric changes may be related to infants’ visual preferences (Cashon et al 2012; Libertus & Needham 2011). Finally, there are many substantial changes in children’s visual attention over the period from 3–9 months (Amso & Johnson 2008; Colombo 2001; Dannemiller 2005; Richards 2010). …”

“…To measure developmental changes in visual attention, we chose a simple visual oddball search paradigm, in which the infant must find a target that varies in its motion or orientation properties from an array of identical distractors (Amso & Johnson 2006; Dannemiller 1998, Dannemiller 2005). Search tasks measure orienting responses rather than sustained stimulus attention (Colombo 2001), reflecting our primary hypothesis that finding faces in complex displays with salient, attention-capturing alternatives may be the problem for young infants (Frank et al 2009).…”

Object- and space-based visual attention: An integrated framework for autonomous robots

“…Such stimulus is attended immediately. The experiment provide a demonstration of motion pop-out [23]. Motion pop-out causes the attention of the robot to be directed on a moving object.…”