Studies showed that individual differences in encoding speed as well as looking behaviour during the encoding of facial stimuli can relate to differences in subsequent face discrimination. Nevertheless, a direct linkage between encoding speed and looking behaviour during the encoding of facial stimuli and the role of these encoding characteristics for subsequent discrimination has not been investigated yet. In the present habituation study, an eye-tracker was used to investigate how individual differences in encoding speed (number of habituation trials) relate to individual differences in looking behaviour on faces and the internal facial features (eyes, nose, and mouth) during encoding as well as discrimination. Forty infants habituated to a photograph of a female face. In a subsequent dishabituation phase, a new face was followed by the familiar one. As expected, the results showed that most of the infants were able to habituate to the face and that they managed to discriminate between the new and the familiar face. Furthermore, correlations and analyses of variance showed that individual differences in encoding during habituation related to differences in looking behaviour during habituation as well as dishabituation. Slower-habituating infants could better discriminate between the new and the familiar face and showed a higher interest in the eyes during habituation as well as dishabituation than faster-habituating infants. These data underline that individual differences in encoding speed relate to individual differences in looking behaviour and that increased looking behaviour to important social cues might help subsequent discrimination.
AmsoD.FitzgeraldM.DavidowJ.GilhoolyT.TottenhamN. (2010). Visual exploration strategies and the development of infants’ facial emotion discrimination. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 180. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00180
2.
BojkoA. (2009). Informative or misleading? Heatmaps deconstructed. In JackoJ. A. (Ed.), Human-computer interaction, Part 1, HCII 2009, LNCS 5610 (pp. 30–39). Berlin, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
3.
BornsteinM. H. (1998). Stability in mental development from early life: Methods, measures, models, meanings and myths. In SimionF.ButterworthG. (Eds.), The development of sensory, motor and cognitive capacities in early infancy (pp. 301–332). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
4.
BornsteinM. H.PêcheuxM.-GLécuyerR. (1988). Visual habituation in human infants: Development and rearing circumstances. Psychological Research, 50, 130–133. doi:10.1007/BF00309213
5.
CaldaraR.SchynsP.MayerE.SmithM. L.GosselinF.RossionB. (2005). Does prosopagnosia take the eyes out of face representations? Evidence for a defect in representing diagnostic facial information following brain damage. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 1652–1666. doi:10.1162/089892905774597254
6.
CohenL. B.CashonC. H. (2001). Do 7-month-old infants process independent features or facial configurations?Infant and Child Development, 10, 83–92. doi:10.1002/icd.250
7.
ColomboJ.FreesemanL. J.ColdrenJ. T.FrickJ. E. (1995). Individual differences in infant fixation duration: Dominance of global versus local stimulus properties. Cognitive Development, 10, 271–285. doi:10.1016/0885-2014(95)90012-8
8.
ColomboJ.MitchellD. W. (1990). Individual differences in early visual attention: Fixation time and information processing. In ColomboJ.FagenJ. (Eds.), Individual differences in infancy: Reliability, stability, prediction (pp. 193–227). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
9.
ColomboJ.MitchellD. W. (2009). Infant visual habituation. Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, 92, 225–234. doi:10.1016/j.nlm.2008.06.002
10.
ColomboJ.ShaddyD. J.RichmanW. A.MaikranzJ. M.BlagaO. M. (2004). The developmental course of habituation in infancy and preschool outcome. Infancy, 5, 1–38. doi:10.1207/s15327078in0501_1
11.
Falck-YtterT.FernellE.GillbergC.von HofstenC. (2010). Face scanning distinguishes social from communication impairments in autism. Developmental Science, 13, 864–875. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00942.x
12.
FantzR. L. (1963). Pattern vision in newborn infants. Science, 140, 296–297. doi:10.1126/science.140.3564.296
13.
FieldT. M.CohenD.GarciaR.GreenbergR. (1984). Mother-stranger face discrimination by the newborn. Infant Behavior and Development, 7, 19–25. doi:10.1016/S0163-6383(84)80019-3
14.
GallayM.BaudouinJ. Y.DurandK.LemoineC.LécuyerR. (2006). Qualitative differences in the exploration of upright and upside-down faces in four-month-old infants: An eye-movement study. Child Development, 77, 984–996. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00914.x
15.
GligaT.CsibraG. (2007). Seeing the face through the eyes: A developmental perspective on face expertise. Progress in Brain Research, 164, 323–339. doi:10.1016/S0079-6123(07)64018-7
16.
GorenC. C.SartyM.WuP. Y. K. (1975).Visual following and pattern discrimination of face-like stimuli by newborn infants. Pediatrics, 56, 544–549.
17.
KavšekM. (2004). Predicting later IQ from infant visual habituation and dishabituation: A meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 369–393. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2004.04.006
18.
KavšekM.BornsteinM. H. (2010). Visual habituation and dishabituation in preterm infants: A review and meta-analysis. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 31, 951–975. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2010.04.016
19.
MaurerD. (1985). Infants’ perception of facedness. In FieldT. M.FoxN. A. (Eds.), Social perception in infants (pp. 73–100). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
20.
MaurerD.LewisT. L. (2001). Visual acuity and spatial contrast sensitivity: Normal development and underlying mechanisms. In NelsonC. A.LucianaM. (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (pp. 237–252). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21.
MaurerD.SalapatekP. (1976). Developmental changes in the scanning of faces by young infants. Child Development, 47, 523–527. doi:10.2307/1128813
22.
OakesL. M. (2010). Using habituation of looking time to assess mental processes in infancy. Journal of Cognition and Development, 11, 255–268. doi:10.1080/15248371003699977
23.
OakesL. M.EllisA. E. (2013). An eye-tracking investigation of developmental changes in infants’ exploration of upright and inverted human faces. Infancy, 18, 134–148. doi:10.1111/j.1532-7078.2011.00107.x
24.
OrlianE. K.RoseS. A. (1997). Speed vs. thoroughness in infant visual information processing. Infant Behavior and Development, 20, 371–381. doi:10.1016/S0163-6383(97)90008-4
25.
PascalisO.de HaanM. (2003). Recognition memory and novelty preference: What model? In HayneH.FagenJ. (Eds.), Progress in infancy research (pp. 95–120). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26.
PascalisO.de SchonenS. (1994). Recognition memory in 3- to 4-day-old human neonates. Neuroreport, 5, 1721–1724. doi:10.1097/00001756-199409080-00008
27.
PascalisO.de SchonenS.MortonJ.DeruelleC.Fabre-GrenetM. (1995). Mother’s face recognition by neonates: A replication and an extension. Infant Behavior and Development, 18, 79–85. doi:10.1016/0163-6383(95)90009-8
28.
PascalisO.SlaterA. (2003). The development of face processing in infancy and early childhood: Current perspectives. New York, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
RoseS. A.JankowskiJ. J.FeldmanJ. F. (2002). Speed of processing and face recognition at 7 and 12 months. Infancy, 3, 435–455. doi:10.1207/S15327078IN0304_02
31.
Rovee-CollierC.BarrR. (2010). Infant learning and memory. In BremnerG.WachsT. D. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of infant development (pp. 271–294). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
32.
SalapatekP. (1975). Pattern perception in early infancy. In CohenL. B.SalapatekP. (Eds.), Infant perception: From sensation to cognition (pp. 133–248). New York, NY: Academic Press.
33.
SchwarzerG.ZaunerN.JovanovicB. (2007). Evidence of a shift from featural to configural face processing in infancy. Developmental Science, 10, 452–463. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00599.x
34.
SokolovE. N. (1963). Perception and the conditioned reflex. New York, NY: MacMillan.
35.
StoeckerJ. J.ColomboJ.FrickJ. E.AllenJ. R. (1998). Long- and short-looking infants’ recognition of symmetrical and asymmetrical forms. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 71, 63–78. doi:10.1006/jecp.1998.2460
