Premium
Goal attribution to schematic animals: do 6‐month‐olds perceive biological motion as animate?
Author(s) -
Schlottmann Anne,
Ray Elizabeth
Publication year - 2010
Publication title -
developmental science
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.801
H-Index - 127
eISSN - 1467-7687
pISSN - 1363-755X
DOI - 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00854.x
Subject(s) - biological motion , schematic , psychology , motion (physics) , attribution , perception , movement (music) , cognitive psychology , stimulus (psychology) , communication , cognition , cognitive science , neuroscience , artificial intelligence , computer science , social psychology , philosophy , electronic engineering , engineering , aesthetics
Infants are sensitive to biological motion, but do they recognize it as animate? As a first step towards answering this question, two experiments investigated whether 6‐month‐olds selectively attribute goals to shapes moving like animals. We habituated infants to a square moving towards one of two targets. When target locations were switched, infants reacted more to movement towards a new goal than a new location – but only if the square moved non‐rigidly and rhythmically, in a schematic version of bio‐mechanical movement older observers describe as animal‐like (Michotte, 1963). Goal attribution was specific to schematic animal motion: It did not occur if the square moved rigidly with the same rhythm as the animate stimulus, or if the square had the same amount of non‐rigid deformation, but in an inanimate configuration. The data would seem to show that perception of schematic animal motion is linked to a system for psychological reasoning from infancy. This in turn suggests that 6‐month‐olds may already interpret biological motion as animate.