4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

The decline of cross-species intersensory perception in human infants: Underlying mechanisms and its developmental persistence

Journal

BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 1242, Issue -, Pages 291-302

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.03.084

Keywords

Infant; Audio-visual perception; Face-voice integration; Perceptual narrowing

Categories

Funding

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [R01 HD035849, R01 HD035849-06, R01 HD35849] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The current study investigated the mechanisms underlying the developmental decline in cross-species intersensory matching first reported by Lewkowicz and Ghazanfar [Lewkowicz, D.J., & Ghazanfar, A.A., (2006). The decline of cross-species intersensory perception in human infants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 103(17), 6771-6774] and whether the decline persists into later development. Experiment 1 investigated whether infants can match monkey vocalizations to asynchronously presented faces and found that neither 4-6 nor 8-10 month-old infants did. Experiment 1 also assessed whether a visual processing deficit may account for the developmental decline in cross-species matching and indicated that it does not because both age groups discriminated silent monkey calls. Experiment 2 investigated whether an auditory processing deficit may account for the decline and indicated that it does not because 8-10 month-old infants discriminated the acoustic versions of the calls. Finally, Experiment 3 asked whether the developmental decline persists into later development by testing cross-species intersensory matching in 12- and 18-month-old infants and showed that it does because neither age group made intersensory matches. Together, these results bolster prior evidence of a decline in cross-species intersensory integration in early human development and shed new light on the mechanisms underlying it. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available