The role of structure in infant visual pattern perception.

Abstract

The research of the authors and others on the role of structure in infant visual pattern perception is reviewed. Two new experiments are reported on preference for symmetry in infants. K is shown that infants reliably prefer patterns with multiple axes of bilateral symmetry relative to asymmetrical patterns. Also, the results demonstrate that vertically oriented single axis bilateral symmetry is more salient than horizontally oriented symmetry in infants as it is in adults. It is argued that sensitivity to various kinds of pattern structure reflects fundamental operations of the visual system.Preparation of this paper and the research reported was supported by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (0001643) to the first author. Thanks to our colleagues Peter Dtxlwell, Darwin Muir, Richard Tees, and Janet Wcrkcr with whom we collaborated on projects reviewed in the paper. Thanks to Dr. Barbara Morrongiello for help in recruiting infants at U.W.O. Richard Tecs and Charles Nelson made very helpful comments and suggestions for improvement on an earlier draft. Address reprint requests to G.

Perceptual reference points for form and orientation in young infants: Anchors or magnets?

“…Younger and Gotlieb ( 1988) also reported equivalent encoding rates for "good" and "poor" gestalts in 3-montholds but observed higher looking times for "poor" over "good" gestalts in infants of the same age range (although this trend was reversed in 5-to 7-month-olds). Furthermore, Humphrey and Humphrey (1989) observed both higher looking times and more rapid encoding rates for "good" over "poor" gestalts in 4-month-olds. Differences in stimulus metrics used to define "goodness" across the studies (Dodwell & Caelli, 1985;Garner, 1974;Posner, Goldsmith, & Welton, 1967) or familiarization procedures (e.g., number and duration of trials) or both may be responsible for some of the inconsistencies in outcomes.…”

“…suit in greater initial looking times during the first part of the familiarization phase (Bornstein, 1978;Humphrey & Humphrey, 1989). Second, on the assumption that "good" gestalts are processed (i.e., encoded) more efficiently than "poor" gestalts, one would expect that the rate of habituation would be faster for "good" gestalts, relative to "poor" gestalts and to distortions of both "good" and "poor" gestalts (Humphrey et a\., 1986).…”

“…In addition, "good" forms have been shown to attract more attention and to be encoded more rapidly than "poor" forms in 4-montholds (Humphrey & Humphrey, 1989;Humphrey et a!., 1986;Younger & Gotlieb, 1988). Moreover, discrimination performance between pairs of"good" forms has been found to be superior to discrimination performance between pairs of "poor" forms in infants of the same age range (Humphrey et a!., 1986), a finding that is consistent with an anchor effect in the psychological space around "good" forms.…”

“…First, reference points may possess preferred perceptual properties that cause them to be attended to a greater degree than other members of a domain (Bornstein, 1978;Humphrey & Humphrey, 1989). Second, reference points may be encoded more efficiently into memory than other members of a domain (Bell & Handel, 1976;Bornstein, Ferdinandsen, & Gross, 1981;Clement & Varnadoe, 1967;Harris, LeTendre, & Bishop, 1974;Heider, 1972;Humphrey, Humphrey, Muir, & Dodwell, 1986;Quinn & Eimas, 1998;Quinn, Siqueland, & Bomba, 1985).…”

Brain Activity in Response to Visual Symmetry

“…Known symmetry-loving animals include finches [16], bees [17], pigeons [18], starlings [19], swordtail fish [20], and even newborn chicks [21]. There is also evidence that preference for symmetry is present already in human infants [22,23]. This large body of research strongly suggests that a symmetry-sensitive visual system is an adaptive phenotype, promoted by natural selection.…”