Humans understand mechanical events to involve physical bodies interacting by contact, but intentional events involve agents that can also interact at a distance. We investigated infant sensitivity to causality in a simple event in which one agent appears to react to another without contact. Infants 9 months old were habituated to one of two events involving a computer-animated red square moving nonrigidly—like a caterpillar—towards a green square. In the ‘reaction event’, the green object moved in turn before the red one stopped, while in the ‘pause event’ the green object moved after the red one stopped. After habituation, each infant saw the habituation movie played in reverse. This test involved identical spatiotemporal changes for reaction and pause event, but the reversed reaction additionally involved a change in the causal roles. Infants dis-habituated to reversal of the reaction but not the pause event, a result which suggests sensitivity to causation-at-a-distance. This ability could support development of social cognition and theory of mind.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baron-CohenS, 1991“Precursors to a theory of mind: Understanding attention in others”, in Natural Theories of Mind: Evolution, Development and Simulation of Everyday Mindreading Ed. WhitenA (Oxford: Blackwell) pp 233–251
2.
BassiliJ N, 1976“Temporal and spatial contingencies in the perception of social events”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology33680–685
3.
BerryD SSpringerK, 1993“Structure, motion, and preschoolers perception of social causality”Ecological Psychology5(4) 273–283
4.
BertenthalB I, 1993“Infants' perception of biomechanical motions: Intrinsic image and knowledge-based constraints”, in Visual Perception and Cognition in Infancy Ed. GranrudC E (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 175–214
5.
ButterworthGJarrettN, 1991“What minds have in common is space: Spatial mechanisms serving joint visual attention in infancy”British Journal of Developmental Psychology955–72
6.
CareySSpelkeE, 1994“Domain-specific knowledge and conceptual change”, in Mapping the Mind Eds HirschfeldL AGelmanS A (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 169–200
7.
CohenL BAmselGCasasolaM, 1997“Precursors to infants' perception of causality”poster presented at SRCD, Washington, DC
8.
DasserVUlbaekIPremackD, 1989“Perception of intention”Science243365–367
9.
FryeD, 1991“The origins of intentions in infancy”, in Children's Theories of Mind Eds FryeDMooreC (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 157–172
10.
GelmanRDurginFKaufmanL, 1995“Distinguishing between animates and inanimates: Not by motion alone”, in Causal Cognition Eds SperberDPremackDPremackA (Oxford: Clarendon Press) pp 150–184
11.
GergelyGNadasdyZCsibraGBiroS, 1995“Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age”Cognition56165–193
12.
GolinkoffR, 1975“Semantic development in infants: The concept of agent and recipient”Merrill-Palmer Quarterly21181–193
13.
HeiderFSimmelM, 1944“An experimental study of apparent behavior”American Journal of Psychology57243–259
14.
KanizsaGVicarioG, 1968“La percezione della reazione intenzionale”, in Ricerche Sperimentali sulla Percezione Eds KanizsaGVicarioG (Trieste: University of Trieste) pp 71–126
15.
KelleyH H, 1967“Attribution theory in social psychology”, in Nebraska Symposium on Motivation 15 Ed. LevineD (Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press) pp 192–238
16.
LeslieA M, 1984“Spatiotemporal continuity and the perception of causality in infants”Perception13287–305
17.
LeslieA M, 1988“The necessity of illusion: Perception and thought in infancy”, in Thought without Language Ed. WeiskrantzL (Oxford: Oxford University Press) pp 185–210
18.
LeslieA M, 1994“To MM, TOBY, and Agency: Core architecture and domain specificity”, in Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture Eds HirschfeldAGelmanS A (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) pp 119–148
MandlerJ M, 1992“How to build a baby II: Conceptual primitives”Psychological Review99587–604
21.
MeltzoffA N, 1995“Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children”Developmental Psychology31838–850
22.
MichotteA E, 1946/1963The Perception of Causality translated into English by MilesT RMilesE (1963, London: Methuen) original work published in French in 1946
23.
MichotteA, 1950“The emotions regarded as functional connections”, reprinted in Michotte's Phenomenology of Perception Eds ThinésGCostallAButterworthG (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates) pp 66–87
24.
PiagetJ, 1936/1971The Construction of Reality in the Child translated into English by CookM (1971, New York: Ballantine) original work published in French in 1936
25.
PremackD, 1990“The infant's theory of self-propelled objects”Cognition361–16
26.
RedwoodM ACohenL B, 1996“Infants' conceptual understanding of agent and patient”poster presented at the 10th International Conference for Infant Studies, Providence, RI
27.
RochatPMorganRCarpenterM, 1997“Young infants' sensitivity to movement information specifying social causality”Cognitive Development12441–465
28.
SchlottmannA, 1999“Seeing it happen and knowing how it works: How children understand the relation between perceptual causality and knowledge of underlying mechanism”Developmental Psychology35503–517
29.
SchlottmannA, in preparation “Young children's intuitions of perceptual causality”
30.
SchlottmannAAndersonN H, 1993“An information integration approach to phenomenal causality”Memory and Cognition21785–801
31.
SchlottmannAShanksD R, 1992“Evidence for a distinction between judged and perceived causality”Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A44321–342
32.
SpelkeE SPhillipsAWoodwardA L, 1995“Infants' knowledge of object motion and human action”, in Causal Cognition Eds SperberDPremackDPremackA (Oxford: Clarendon Press) pp 44–78
33.
XuFCareyS, 1996“Infants' metaphysics: The case of numerical identity”Cognitive Psychology30111–153
