Novelty, familiarity, and infant reasoning
Novelty, familiarity, and infant reasoning
复制标题
新颖性、熟悉性和婴儿推理
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2004
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
A. Slater
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
A. Slater
当刺激可能是可辨别的，但不会引起自发的差异观察时，习惯上使用习惯化-非习惯化方法的一种或其他变体来调查它们的可辨别性，并且文献中有大量此类研究。然而，在习惯化-非习惯化过程中有许多变化，在所调查的感觉模式内部和之间都有变化。此外，婴儿的注意力是一个动态的过程，可能会随着时间的推移而改变，并且由于程序的巨大变化，通常很难知道婴儿在测试中是给予熟悉还是新奇的偏好，这可能使结果的解释成为一个困难的，而且经常是有争议的问题。Houston-Price和Nakai给出了一些清晰的例子，说明婴儿偏好的变化本质，并将其与测试前的熟悉程度联系起来。他们喜欢的模型（得到了大量支持）是由Hunter和Ames（1988）等人提出的，在这个模型中，偏好随着熟悉时间的推移而变化，从既不喜欢熟悉也不喜欢新奇，到熟悉，再到没有偏好，再到新奇偏好。他们认为，“如果当对熟悉刺激的编码完成时，人们的注意力就会从熟悉的事物转移到新奇的事物上……那么，随着时间的推移，偏好的变化模式应该会提供关于所获得效果的身份的关键信息。”我认为，这种注意力的转移并不总是被发现的，在许多情况下，我们需要汇集证据来澄清实验结果。版权所有©2004 John Wiley & Sons， Ltd
Where stimuli are possibly discriminable but do not elicit spontaneous differential looking it is customary to use one or other variation of the habituation–dishabituation method in order to investigate their discriminability, and the literature abounds with such studies. However, there are many variations on habituation–dishabituation procedures, varying both within and between the sensory modalities investigated. Additionally, infant attention is a dynamic process which is likely to change over time, and given the great variations in procedures it can often be difficult to know whether infants are giving a familiarity or a novelty preference at test, which can make interpretation of results a difficult, and often controversial problem. Houston-Price and Nakai give some clear examples of the changing nature of infant preferences, and relate them particularly to the amount of familiarisation prior to testing. The model they favour (and which receives a good deal of support) is that put forward by (among others) Hunter and Ames (1988) in which preferences change over the course of familiarisation time, from preference for neither familiarity or novelty, to familiarity, to no preference, to a novelty preference. They suggest that ‘If an attentional shift from what is familiar to what is novel is always found as the encoding of a familiar stimulus… is completed… then the pattern of change in preference over time should provide crucial information regarding the identity of the obtained effect’. I will argue that this attentional shift is not always found, and that in many instances we need converging evidence in order to clarify experimental findings. Copyright © 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.