| Literature DB >> 21533093 |
Orsola Rosa Salva1, Teresa Farroni, Lucia Regolin, Giorgio Vallortigara, Mark Henry Johnson.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Converging evidence from different species indicates that some newborn vertebrates, including humans, have visual predispositions to attend to the head region of animate creatures. It has been claimed that newborn preferences for faces are domain-relevant and similar in different species. One of the most common criticisms of the work supporting domain-relevant face biases in human newborns is that in most studies they already have several hours of visual experience when tested. This issue can be addressed by testing newly hatched face-naïve chicks (Gallus gallus) whose preferences can be assessed prior to any other visual experience with faces.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21533093 PMCID: PMC3080385 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018802
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Newly hatched domestic chicks.
| Experiment number | Stimuli | Properties controlled for | Main result | |
| Rosa Salva et al. (2010) Dev Sci, 13, 565–577. | Exp. 1, 3–4 | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis, up-down distribution of inner elements, object-like structure | Preference for approaching face-like stimuli, independently of the number of features present in the upper vs. lower half of the configuration |
| Bolhuis & Horn (1997) Physiol Behav, 62, 1235–2139. | Exp. 1, 2 | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | Preference for approaching the naturalistic object.The emergence of the preference is characterized by a sensitive period that can be delayed by injections of anaesthetic agents (equithesin) |
| Hampton et al. (1995) Behaviour, 132, 451–477. | Exp. 1–3 | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | Preference for approaching the naturalistic object, emerging 2–5 h after non-specific releasing experience (motor activity, handling, exposure to maternal calls etc) |
| Davies et al. (1992) Dev Psychobiol, 25, 251–259. | / | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | Preference for approaching the naturalistic object (characterized by a sensitive period that can be delayed by administration of neurotoxin DSP4) |
| Johnson & Horn (1988) Anim Behav, 36, 675–683. | Exp. 1–5 | Naturalistic objects (stuffed jungle fowl, gadwall duck and polecat); altered versions of the stuffed fowl (disarticulate fowls maintaining or removing outline complexity, scrambled fowls preserving only the texture of the original stimuli) and artificial objects (simple red box and striped red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry, stimulus complexity, stimulus outline, stimulus texture | Preference for approaching the normal stuffed jungle fowl with respect to both the simple and the complex artificial stimulus, and to a scrambled fowl that maintains only the texture of the naturalistic stimulus.Disarticulated fowls reassembled in anatomically unusual ways (either preserving outline complexity or mounting the limbs on a square cardboard background) and other stuffed animals are equally preferred to the normal stuffed hen. The head alone of the stuffed fowl elicits a similar preference to the whole hen, indicating that features in the head region are crucial for chicks' approach behaviour |
| Bolhuis & Trooster (1988) Anim Behav, 36, 668–674. | / | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (a red box whose overall attractiveness is manipulated changing its illumination level) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | After imprinting on an artificial stimulus, subsequent exposure to a naturalistic object determines a shift in chicks' preference in favour of the latter (such secondary imprinting is not evident in chicks first exposed to the stuffed hen and then to the red box) |
| Bolhuis et al. (1985) Dev Psychobiol, 18, 299–308. | Exp. 1, 2 | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | Preference for approaching the naturalistic object; the emergence of the preference is speed up by exposure to visual patterned input (abstract geometrical configuration) |
| Johnson et al. (1985) Anim Behav, 33, 1000–1006. | / | Naturalistic object (stuffed jungle fowl) vs. artificial object (red box) | Presence of structured objects, approximate overall vertical symmetry | 24 h after imprinting on either the naturalistic or the artificial object, chicks prefer to approach the naturalistic object, regardless of their imprinting stimulus (the preference emerges also after simple motor activity) |
| Boakes & Panter (1985) Anim Behav, 33, 353–365. | Exp. 2 | Live hen, artificial moving objects (rotating cup, windmill) | Presence of structured objects, approximate vertical symmetry | After imprinting on a live hen, no secondary imprinting on an artificial object is possible |
Newborn human babies.
| Experiment number | Stimuli | Properties controlled for | Main result | |
| Farroni et al. (2005) PNAS, 102, 17245–17250. | Exp. 1a, 1b | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (non-face stimuli are constructed rotating the inner face features by 180° with respect to the outer facial contour), contrast polarity | Preference for looking at face-like stimuli only in images having the normal contrast polarity expected for a face |
| Exp. 2a, 2b | Photographic images of faces | Approximate symmetry along the vertical axis, contrast polarity, direction of illumination | Preference for looking at face-like stimuli only in images having the normal contrast polarity expected for a face or illuminated from above (natural illumination) | |
| Macchi Cassia et al. (2004) Psychol Sci, 15, 379–383. | Exp. 1–3 | Photographic images of faces | Approximate symmetry along the vertical axis (in Exp. 1 the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°), presence of structured object-like visual patterns | Preference for looking at naturally arranged faces and at the visual pattern with more high contrast elements in its upper part |
| Farroni et al. (2004) Infancy, 5, 39–60. | Exp. 1 | Schematic faces | Presence of structured object-like visual patterns | Preference for looking at faces with direct gaze, more resembling the “canonical” representation of face's structure hypothesised to guide newborns' face preferences (as opposed to adverted gaze) |
| Farroni et al. (2002) PNAS, 99, 9602–9605. | Exp. 1 | Photographic images of faces | Presence of structured object-like visual patterns | Preference for looking at faces with direct gaze (see above) |
| Macchi Cassia et al. (2001) Dev Sci, 4, 101–108. | / | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°) | Preference for looking at the schematic face |
| Batki et al (2000) Inf Behav Dev, 23, 223–229. | / | Photographic images of faces | Approximate symmetry along the vertical axis, presence of structured object-like visual patterns | Preference for looking at faces with open eyes, more resembling the “canonical” representation of face's structure hypothesised to guide newborns' face preferences (as opposed to faces with eyes closed) |
| Farroni et al. (1999) Dev Sci, 2, 174–186. | Exp 1, 4 | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°) | A face-like stimulus (but not a non-face-like one) is effective in engaging a subcortical collicular visual mechanism that determines the presence of a gap effect (facilitation in disengagement from a central fixation if a temporal gap is introduced between its disappearance and the appearance of a peripheral fixation point). |
| Simion et al. (1998) J Exp Psychol Human, 24, 1399–1405. | Exp. 1 | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°) | Preference for looking at the schematic face (selective for stimuli presented in the temporal hemifield) |
| Slater et al. (1998) Inf Behav Dev, 21, 345–354. | Exp. 1, 2 | Photographic images of faces (rated for their attractiveness by adults) | Approximate symmetry along the vertical axis, presence of structured object-like visual patterns, attractiveness. In Exp. 2 stimuli are also equated for brightness and contrast. | Preference for looking at attractive faces, more resembling the “canonical” representation of face's structure hypothesised to guide newborns' face preferences (as opposed to unattractive ones) |
| Valenza et al. (1996) J Exp Psychol Human, 22, 892–903. | Exp. 1a, 1b, 3 | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°), visibility of the stimuli to newborns' visual system | Preference for looking at the schematic face (even when compared to stimuli having the optimal visibility for newborns' visual system) |
| Umiltà et al. (1996) Europ Psychol, 1, 200–205. | Exp. 1, 3, 4 | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (the non-face stimulus is obtained rotating the inner face features by 180°), visibility of the stimuli for newborns' visual system | Preference for looking at the schematic face. The preference for the face is evident even when compared to stimuli having the optimal visibility for newborns' visual system, but is selective for stimuli presented in the temporal hemifield (index of subcortical engagement). |
| Johnson et al. (1991) Cognition, 40, 1–19. | Exp. 1–2 | Schematic faces (represented with different levels of detail) | Symmetry along the vertical axis (non-face stimuli are obtained rotating the inner face features by 180° or displacing the features in unnatural positions, preserving overall symmetry) | Preference for looking at naturally arranged schematic faces |
| Goern et al. (1975) Pediatrics, 56, 544–549. | / | Schematic faces | Symmetry along the vertical axis (severely and moderately scrambled non-face stimuli are obtained by displacing schematic face features in unnatural positions, preserving overall symmetry); overall brightness | Preference for looking at naturally arranged schematic faces |
Figure 1Example of one the control noise stimuli used in the newborns' study.
The same stimulus reproduced in this figure was also used with chicks in Experiment 2. See also [15], [16] for the face stimuli employed.