Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2010 Feb;33(1):79-87.
doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2009.11.003. Epub 2009 Dec 23.

Infants use attention but not emotions to predict others' actions

Amrisha Vaish  1 , Amanda Woodward
Affiliations

Infants use attention but not emotions to predict others' actions

Amrisha Vaish et al. Infant Behav Dev. 2010 Feb.

Abstract

Phillips et al. (2002) suggest that by 12-14 months, infants can use a person's emotional and attentional cues to predict that person's actions. However, this work was conducted using only positive emotions, which is problematic because attention and positive emotions lead to the same prediction about a person's actions, thus leaving unclear whether infants made predictions based upon attention and emotion or attention alone. To get around this problem, we used both positive and negative emotions in a looking-time paradigm to investigate whether 14-month-old infants can use emotional cues to predict a person's actions. The findings suggest that infants used attentional but not emotional cues as predictors. We argue that while 14-month-olds can use another person's emotion cues to modify their own behavior (as in social referencing situations), they do not yet use them robustly to predict the other's behavior.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Duration of looks to the four happy versus the four disgust familiarization events as well as the average duration of looks to all four familiarization events. *p < .05.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Average duration of looks to attended versus unattended test events by infants who saw an attended event first versus infants who saw an unattended event first. *p < .05.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Recovery in infants’ looking from the last familiarization to the first attended versus unattended trial, in the happy condition (top) and disgust condition (bottom). Note that only infants who habituated are included in the graph of the disgust condition. *: p < .05.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Cacioppo JT, Gardner WL, Berntson GG. Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 1997;1:3–25. - PubMed
    1. Caron AJ, Caron RF, Antell SE. Infant understanding of containment: An affordance perceived or a relationship conceived? Developmental Psychology. 1998;24(5):620–627.
    1. Ekman P, Friesen WV. Unmasking the face: A guide to recognizing emotions from facial clues. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall; 1975.
    1. Gergely G, Egyed K, Király I. On pedagogy. Developmental Science. 2007;10(1):139–146. - PubMed
    1. Hertenstein MJ, Campos JJ. The retention effects of an adult’s emotional displays on infant behavior. Child Development. 2004;75:595–613. - PubMed

Publication types