ogether, theseresults revealed that infants learned and remembered thecolours on both sides of the screens during orientationbut used the agent’s perceptions, which included only theback of the screens, to predict and interpret her actionsduring test, even when the agent’s perceptions differedfrom their own
These findings provide support for the notion that infants possess perspective-taking
In the current studies, infants aged 9 months and older re-sponded differently and appropriately when the experimenter wasunwilling to give them a toy (with impatience) as compared withwhen she was trying to give them a toy (with patience)— eventhough they did not actually receive the toy in either case.
Main finding of the study
test
There were three different groups: tease group, refuse group, and play group. Each group had three different conditions which were the different levels of the IV.
When 9-month-old infants saw an actor graspan object, they focused on the object that wasgrasped more than other details of the event
This was an interesting finding to me. I did not know prior to taking this course that infants had sensitivity to behavioral intentions when they are in a social setting inferring others' intentions/preferences
The major finding of this study is that infants as young as 2months of age can categorize spectrally dissimilar vowels pho-netically.
Similar to the other language article we were assigned, this finding really struck me since like I stated in the previous article, it is something I was not aware of prior to taking this course or that infants even possessed this ability.
That is, young infants discriminate the place of articulation contrasts according to linguistic category without specific linguistic experience, whereas adult speech perceptual ability is more limited, reflecting discrimination of only those contrasts which are phonemic in the listener's native language
This finding was certainly something new for me. I was amazed by it since I did not know infants possessed the ability to distinguish between languages at such an early age and that this skill declines with age.
"head turn"
This was the experimental method utilized for testing infants
looking time
Looking time was the dependent variable being measured in all experiments to see which event infants tend to look at longer and find the most surprising/uncommon that captures their attention.
One is thatinfants recognize the event in terms of physicalcausality, that is, in accord with the contact prin-ciple. If this is the case, the looking time ofinfants for the no-contact event should belonger than that for the contact event. Theother possibility is that infants recognize theevent in terms of the voluntary action ofpeople. If so, infants should respond similarly tothe two events, as in Woodward et a
Two possible explanations for how infants might interpret the atypical event of someone falling without being touched or having any physical contact with anything around.
We predicted that ifinfants noticed how much each box compressed theplatform and could infer—by applying the weight-compression rule—which box was lighter andwhich was heavier, then they should again reachprospectively for the lighter box.
Hypothesis for experiment two
preferential-reaching tasks:
one of the experimental methods utilized to test for the weight-compression rule
inanimate-control condition
This was one of the Independent variables and had two levels: the equal event where the cookie was split fairly between the two penguins or an unequal event where the cookie was split unfairly between the two.
A first predictionwas that 9-month-olds would give evidence of sensitivity tofairness if presented with a 2:0 violation. Experiments 1 and 2both tested this prediction, using slightly different proceduresthat made possible different control conditions. A secondprediction, tested in Experiment 3, was that 9-month-olds wouldsucceed in detecting a 2:0 but not a 3:1 violation. Finally, a thirdprediction was that infants younger than 9 months might alsosucceed in detecting a 2:0 violation.
Three main study predictions/hypothesis
we predicted that infants would view themas inanimate penguin-shaped toys, would hold no expectationsabout how the experimenter would divide the cookies betweenthem, and hence would look about equally at the equal andunequal events
Hypothesis
Clearly, neither theimmaturity of their brain nor theirinability to talk limits how longyoung infants can remember anevent.
This is interesting to me because I know these factors could certainly influence memory. However, despite that, it has been shown that infants possess the ability to recall for long periods of time, if and only they are periodically exposed to the cues that aid in the memory retrieval process.
The data support theexpectation that infant have long term memory for a socialstressor over the recall interval.
This was an interesting finding to me but not too surprising since I know stress can certainly influence a human beings memory and performance.
We expected thatinfants in the experimental condition would exhibit evidence formemory for the FFSF both at physiological and behavioral levelscompared to age-matched control infants
Main hypothesis: Based on the results, it was supported.
infants’ states
Dependent variable two: five different levels
Four levels of mouth–tongue movements
Dependent variable one
frequency and the duration ofmfants' mouth c^enmgs and tongue protru-sions
This was the dependent variables used in the study: frequency and duration of the specific babies' behaviors