Discrimination of color and pattern novelty in one-month human infants

Milewski, Allen E.; Siqueland, Einar R.

doi:10.1016/0022-0965(75)90154-x

Cited by 55 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact is that highly discrepant stimuli may be differentiated on a recognition test following lengthy study time at very early ages. While the Fagan et al (1971) study found n o evidence for visual recognition in infants younger than 10-12 weeks, subsequent studies by Friedman (1972), Friedman, Bruno, andVietze (1974), Milewski andSiqueland (1975), andMilewski (1978) showed that visual recognition memory is possible during the first month of life.…”

Section: 'He Interaction Of Age Study Time and Stimulimentioning

confidence: 95%

The Paired‐Comparison Paradigm and Infant Intelligence

Fagan

1990

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: 'He Interaction Of Age Study Time and Stimulimentioning

confidence: 95%

The Paired‐Comparison Paradigm and Infant Intelligence

Fagan

1990

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In Friedman's studies this ranged There is some controversy concerning the youngest age at which an infant will habituate, A consideration of these studies suggests that it may be possible to demonstrate visual between 8 and 20 minutes. In Werner & Siqueland's study it was a minimum of 5 minutes: full details are not given, but in a paper by Milewski & Siqueland (1975) one-month-old infants took an average of 84 minutes t o habituate, with a range from 5 to 17 minutes.…”

Section: Visual Memory At Birth Alan Hater Victoria Morison and Davimentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual memory at birth

Slater¹,

Morison²,

Rose³

1982

British J of Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments are described whose aim was to explore the new‐born baby's capacity for forming visual memories. An habituation procedure was used that accommodated individual differences by allowing each infant to control the time course of the habituation trials. In Expt 1 an habituation‐dishabituation paradigm was used, and in Expt 2 subjects were given paired presentation of novel and familiar stimuli following attainment of the criterion of habituation. In both experiments a significant novelty preference was found, and the results provide strong evidence that recognition memory can be reliably demonstrated from birth.

show abstract

“…Infants increase the rate of sucking, for example, as readily when their sucks are followed by their mother's voice (DeCasper & Fifer, 1980;Mills & Melhuish, 1974), a computer-generated speech sound (Eimas, Siqueland, Jusczyk, & Vigorito, 1971;Trehub & Rabinovitch, 1972), music (Butterfield & Siperstein, 1972), a movie (Bower, 1967;Kalnins & Bruner, 1973), colored slides of geometric shapes (Franks & Berg, 1975;Milewski & Siqueland, 1975), the movement of a crib mobile (Little, 1973;Rovee & Rovee, 1969), or termination of white noise (Butterfield & Siperstein, 1972), as when their sucks are followed by a squirt of sugar water (Kobre & Lipsitt, 1972) or milk (Hillman & Bruner, 1972;Sameroff, 1968)! Head-turning is similarly reinforced by a variety of biologically unrelated consequences-a visual pattern (Levinson & Levinson, 1967) or a novel toy (Koch, 1968), a human jack-in-the-box (Bower, 1964), visual access to the mother or a stranger (Koch, 1968), a squirt of milk (Papousek, 1961) or sugar water (Clifton, Siqueland, & Lipsitt, 1972), a nonnutritive nipple (Siqueland, 1968a), or simply by "being correct" (Papousek, 1967).…”

Section: Reinforcer Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%