Another Look at Looking Time: Surprise as Rational Statistical Inference

Decades of developmental research have capitalized on the fact that infants are surprised (i.e., look longer) at some events but not others. Differences in looking time have been considered to be a reflection of perceptual discrimination, or a reaction toward witnessing a violation of prior expectations. Here, we provide an overview of a new perspective on infant surprise that examines the underlying cognitive processes that drive this response. We suggest that looking time may reflect sophisticated statistical inference, and we review empirical evidence and computational modeling results from several recent studies to support this conjecture (Kidd, Piantadosi, & Aslin, ; Piantadosi, Kidd, & Aslin, ; Sim, Griffiths, & Xu, ; Sim & Xu, ; Téglás et al., ). We also discuss how our view relates to other new developmental research on surprise and learning (Stahl & Feigenson, , ) and outline some suggestions for future research.

[1]  R L FANTZ,et al.  The origin of form perception. , 1961, Scientific American.

[2]  P. Holland,et al.  Different Roles for Amygdala Central Nucleus and Substantia Innominata in the Surprise-Induced Enhancement of Learning , 2006, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[3]  A. Gopnik,et al.  Reconstructing constructivism: causal models, Bayesian learning mechanisms, and the theory theory. , 2012, Psychological bulletin.

[4]  R. Baillargeon.  Innate Ideas Revisited: For a Principle of Persistence in Infants' Physical Reasoning , 2008, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[5]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  A tutorial introduction to Bayesian models of cognitive development , 2011, Cognition.

[6]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Probabilistic models of cognition: exploring representations and inductive biases , 2010, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[7]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  Statistical learning of new visual feature combinations by infants , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[8]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Generalization, similarity, and Bayesian inference. , 2001, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[9]  Aimee E. Stahl,et al.  Expectancy violations promote learning in young children , 2017, Cognition.

[10]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  From mere coincidences to meaningful discoveries , 2007, Cognition.

[11]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Word learning as Bayesian inference. , 2007, Psychological review.

[12]  E. Spelke,et al.  Large number discrimination in 6-month-old infants , 2000, Cognition.

[13]  Sylvain Sirois,et al.  Infant cognition: going full factorial with pupil dilation. , 2009, Developmental science.

[14]  Fei Xu,et al.  Intuitive statistics by 8-month-old infants , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[15]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  Young infants' reasoning about hidden objects: evidence from violation-of-expectation tasks with test trials only , 2004, Cognition.

[16]  R. L. Fantz.  Visual Experience in Infants: Decreased Attention to Familiar Patterns Relative to Novel Ones , 1964, Science.

[17]  David M. Sobel,et al.  A theory of causal learning in children: causal maps and Bayes nets. , 2004, Psychological review.

[18]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  The Goldilocks Effect: Human Infants Allocate Attention to Visual Sequences That Are Neither Too Simple Nor Too Complex , 2012, PloS one.

[19]  R. Baillargeon,et al.  Do 15-Month-Old Infants Understand False Beliefs? , 2005, Science.

[20]  J. Colombo,et al.  Infant visual habituation , 2009, Neurobiology of Learning and Memory.

[21]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Visual statistical learning in infancy: evidence for a domain general learning mechanism , 2002, Cognition.

[22]  Charles Kemp,et al.  How to Grow a Mind: Statistics, Structure, and Abstraction , 2011, Science.

[23]  S. Sirois,et al.  Social cognition in infancy: A critical review of research on higher order abilities , 2007 .

[24]  Vittorio Girotto,et al.  Intuitions of probabilities shape expectations about the future at 12 months and beyond , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[25]  M. Hershenson.  VISUAL DISCRIMINATION IN THE HUMAN NEWBORN. , 1964, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[26]  Fei Xu,et al.  Infants preferentially approach and explore the unexpected , 2017, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[27]  E. Spelke,et al.  Object permanence in five-month-old infants , 1985, Cognition.

[28]  Arlette Streri,et al.  Dissociation between small and large numerosities in newborn infants. , 2014, Developmental science.

[29]  Z. Nadasdy,et al.  Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age , 1995, Cognition.

[30]  Celeste Kidd,et al.  Rich analysis and rational models: inferring individual behavior from infant looking data. , 2014, Developmental science.

[31]  R. Aslin.  What's in a look? , 2007, Developmental science.

[32]  D. Berlyne.  The influence of the albedo and complexity of stimuli on visual fixation in the human infant. , 1958, British journal of psychology.

[33]  Visual preference in the four-month old infant , 1966 .

[34]  E. Spelke,et al.  Origins of knowledge. , 1992, Psychological review.

[35]  Edward Vul,et al.  Pure Reasoning in 12-Month-Old Infants as Probabilistic Inference , 2011, Science.

[36]  Fei Xu,et al.  Infants Are Rational Constructivist Learners , 2013 .

[37]  Aimee E. Stahl,et al.  Observing the unexpected enhances infants’ learning and exploration , 2015, Science.