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
. 2008 Jan 1;23(1):24-37.
doi: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2007.09.002.

Calculating the Attentional Orientation of an Unfamiliar Agent in Infancy

Susan C Johnson  1 , Matthias Bolz, Erin Carter, John Mandsanger, Alisha Teichner, Patricia Zettler
Affiliations

Calculating the Attentional Orientation of an Unfamiliar Agent in Infancy

Susan C Johnson et al. Cogn Dev. .

Abstract

By the end of the first year, infants are able to recognize both goal-directed and perceptually guided behavior in the actions of non-human agents, even faceless ones. How infants derive the relevant orientation of an unfamiliar agent in the absence of familiar markers such as eyes, ears, or face is unknown. The current studies tested the hypothesis that infants' calculate an agent's "front" from the geometry of its behavior in the spatial environment. In the first study, 14- to 15-month-old infants observed a symmetrical, faceless agent either interact contingently with a confederate or act randomly. It then turn toward one of two target objects. Infants were more likely to look in the direction the agent turned than the opposite direction, but only in the contingent condition. In the second study, the location of the confederate and target objects was varied, which in turned influenced which end of the agent infants interpreted as the front. Finally, implications for infants' early gaze-following behaviors with humans are tested and implications for theory of mind development more broadly are discussed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The configuration of infant, novel agent, confederate and targets in the Proximal and Distal condition of Study 2. Both conditions in Study 1 used the Proximal configuration.
Figure 2
Figure 2
The mean number of first looks away from the novel agent in each direction. Dark bars represent looks in the direction in which the proximal end of the agent turned. Light bars represent looks in the direction in which the distal end turned. Error bars represent standard errors.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The configuration of the infant, agent, and targets in Study 3.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Biro S, Leslie AM. Infants#x02019; perception of goal-directed actions: Development through cue-based bootstrapping. Developmental Science. 2007;10(3):379–398. - PubMed
    1. Brooks R, Meltzoff AN. The importance of eyes: How infants interpret adult looking behavior. Developmental Psychology. 2002;38(6):958–966. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Brooks R, Meltzoff AM. The development of gaze following and its relation to language. Developmental Science. 2005;8(6):535–543. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Butler SC, Caron AJ, Brooks R. Infant understanding of the referential nature of look. Journal of Cognition and Development. 2000;1(4):359–377.
    1. Butterworth G, Jarrett N. What minds have in common is space: Spatial mechanisms serving joint visual attention in infancy. British Journal of Developmental Psychology. 1991;9:55–72.

LinkOut - more resources