Newborns' preference for face-relevant stimuli: Effects of contrast polarity

Abstract

There is currently no agreement as to how specific or general are the mechanisms underlying newborns' face preferences. We address this issue by manipulating the contrast polarity of schematic and naturalistic face-related images and assessing the preferences of newborns. We find that for both schematic and naturalistic face images, the contrast polarity is important. Newborns did not show a preference for an upright face-related image unless it was composed of darker areas around the eyes and mouth. This result is consistent with either sensitivity to the shadowed areas of a face with overhead (natural) illumination and͞or to the detection of eye contact.eye contact ͉ face processing

Eye contrast polarity is critical for face recognition by infants

“…Dannemiller and Stephens (1988) and Mondloch et al (1999) consistently reported that 12 week olds, but not 6 weeks olds or newborns, preferred schematic faces with positive contrast polarity over contrast reversed versions of the same stimuli. In addition, and again consistent with Farroni et al (2005), Otsuka, Hill, Kanazawa, Yamaguchi, and Spehar (2012) reported that a preference for upright over upside-down two-tone facial images disappeared when the contrast polarity of the stimuli was reversed. The disappearance of an upright face preference for contrast reversed stimuli suggests that the "faceness" of the facial images may be lost when contrast polarity is reversed.…”

“…Farroni et al (2005) examined preference for upright over inverted schematic faces (consisting of three dark blobs on a white surface) and for facial photographs in newborn infants. They found that newborns' preference for upright images disappeared when the contrast polarity was reversed.…”

Exploring the Nature of Joint Attention Impairments in Young Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Associated Social and Cognitive Skills

“…In typical development, children are showing a preference for social stimuli over nonsocial stimuli as from the day they are born (e.g., Farroni et al, 2005). This preference remains present during development (e.g., Fletcher-Watson, Findlay, Leekam, & Benson, 2008), and is assumed to have an important influence on social communicative skills.…”

“…In typical development, children are inherently rewarded to participate in social interactions, in which they learn about social and communicative skills. This tendency seems to be reflected in a social preference, which children are showing from the day they are born (e.g., Cassia, Valenza, Simion, & Leo, 2008;Farroni et al, 2005;Valenza, Simion, Cassia, & Umiltà, 1996) and that stimulates them to look at people, and to prefer social stimuli like voices and faces over nonsocial stimuli. Children and adults with ASD do not show this typical tendency to orient towards social stimuli and also tend to use different face scanning patterns (Celani, 2002;Dawson et al, 2004;Fletcher-Watson, Benson, Frank, Leekam, & Findlay, 2009;Jones, Carr, & Klin, 2008;Maestro et al, 2005;Pelphrey et al, 2002;Sasson et al, 2007).…”

Unconscious discrimination of social cues from eye whites in infants

“…From birth, infants respond sensitively to human eyes: Newborns prefer direct gaze faces over averted gaze faces (30) and even show a rudimentary form of gaze following (31). Newborns' sensitivity to eyes has been shown to be specific to the human sclera, as behavioral preferences disappear when the contrast polarity of the eye is reversed (32). Nevertheless, the ability to attend to the eyes and follow gaze improves considerably over the course of the first year of life and is viewed as an important marker of healthy social development (33,34).…”