Literature DB >> 25113916

Infants' ability to respond to depth from the retinal size of human faces: comparing monocular and binocular preferential-looking.

Aki Tsuruhara1, Sherryse Corrow2, So Kanazawa3, Masami K Yamaguchi4, Albert Yonas2.   

Abstract

To examine sensitivity to pictorial depth cues in young infants (4 and 5 months-of-age), we compared monocular and binocular preferential looking to a display on which two faces were equidistantly presented and one was larger than the other, depicting depth from the size of human faces. Because human faces vary little in size, the correlation between retinal size and distance can provide depth information. As a result, adults perceive a larger face as closer than a smaller one. Although binocular information for depth provided information that the faces in our display were equidistant, under monocular viewing, no such information was provided. Rather, the size of the faces indicated that one was closer than the other. Infants are known to look longer at apparently closer objects. Therefore, we hypothesized that infants would look longer at a larger face in the monocular than in the binocular condition if they perceived depth from the size of human faces. Because the displays were identical in the two conditions, any difference in looking-behavior between monocular and binocular viewing indicated sensitivity to depth information. Results showed that 5-month-old infants preferred the larger, apparently closer, face in the monocular condition compared to the binocular condition when static displays were presented. In addition, when presented with a dynamic display, 4-month-old infants showed a stronger 'closer' preference in the monocular condition compared to the binocular condition. This was not the case when the faces were inverted. These results suggest that even 4-month-old infants respond to depth information from a depth cue that may require learning, the size of faces.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Depth; Face; Familiar size; Infant; Preferential looking; Relative size

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25113916      PMCID: PMC4262569          DOI: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2014.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Infant Behav Dev        ISSN: 0163-6383


  21 in total

1.  Discrimination of possible and impossible objects in infancy.

Authors:  Sarah M Shuwairi; Marc K Albert; Scott P Johnson
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2007-04

2.  Newborns' preferential tracking of face-like stimuli and its subsequent decline.

Authors:  M H Johnson; S Dziurawiec; H Ellis; J Morton
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1991-08

3.  Object distance as a determinant of visual fixation in early infancy.

Authors:  B E McKenzie; R H Day
Journal:  Science       Date:  1972-12-08       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  The adjustment of reaching behavior to object distance in early infancy.

Authors:  J Field
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  1976-03

5.  Size constancy at birth: newborn infants' responses to retinal and real size.

Authors:  A Slater; A Mattock; E Brown
Journal:  J Exp Child Psychol       Date:  1990-04

6.  Development of sensitivity to pictorial depth.

Authors:  A Yonas; W T Cleaves; L Pettersen
Journal:  Science       Date:  1978-04-07       Impact factor: 47.728

7.  Infants' sensitivity to familiar size as information for distance.

Authors:  A Yonas; L Pettersen; C E Granrud
Journal:  Child Dev       Date:  1982-10

8.  Stereopsis in human infants.

Authors:  R Fox; R N Aslin; S L Shea; S T Dumais
Journal:  Science       Date:  1980-01-18       Impact factor: 47.728

9.  Infants' responsiveness to pictorial depth cues in preferential-reaching studies: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Michael Kavsek; Carl E Granrud; Albert Yonas
Journal:  Infant Behav Dev       Date:  2009-03-27
View more
  1 in total

1.  Sample size, statistical power, and false conclusions in infant looking-time research.

Authors:  Lisa M Oakes
Journal:  Infancy       Date:  2014-04-05
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.