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
. 2020 Jan;25(1):110-124.
doi: 10.1111/infa.12320.

Infants' reasoning about samples generated by intentional versus non-intentional agents

Affiliations

Infants' reasoning about samples generated by intentional versus non-intentional agents

Elizabeth Attisano et al. Infancy. 2020 Jan.

Abstract

The current experiments investigate how infants use goal-directed action to reason about intentionally sampled outcomes in a probabilistic inference paradigm. Older infants and young children are flexible in their expectations of sampling: They expect random samples to reflect population statistics and non-random samples to reflect an agent's preferences or goals (Kushnir, Xu, & Wellman, 2010; Xu & Denison, 2009). However, more recent work shows that probabilistic inference comes online at approximately 6 months (Denison, Reed, & Xu, 2013; Kayhan, Gredebäck, & Lindskog, 2017; Ma & Xu, 2011; Wellman, Kushnir, Xu, & Brink, 2016), and thus, these sampling assumptions can be investigated at the age probabilistic reasoning first emerges. Results indicate that 6-month-old infants expect a human agent to sample in accord with their goal and do not expect the same of an unintentional agent-a mechanical claw. By 9.5 months, infants expect the mechanical claw to sample in accord with random sampling. These results suggest that infants use goals to make inferences about intentional sampling, under appropriate conditions at 6 months, and they have expectations of the kinds of samples a mechanical device should obtain by 9.5 months.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

REFERENCES

    1. Biro, S., & Leslie, A. M. (2007). Infants’ perception of goal‐directed actions: Development through cue‐based bootstrapping. Developmental Science, 10(3), 379–398. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00544.x
    1. Buresh, J. S., & Woodward, A. L. (2007). Infants track action goals within and across agents. Cognition, 104(2), 287–314. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.07.001
    1. Carey, S. (2009). The origins of concepts. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
    1. Denison, S., Reed, C., & Xu, F. (2013). The emergence of probabilistic reasoning in very young infants: Evidence from 4.5‐and 6‐month‐olds. Developmental Psychology, 49(2), 243. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028278
    1. Denison, S., Trikutam, P., & Xu, F. (2014). Probability versus representativeness in infancy: Can infants use naïve physics to adjust population base rates in probabilistic inference? Developmental Psychology, 50(8), 2009. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037158

Publication types