The Goldilocks Effect: Human Infants Allocate Attention to Visual Sequences That Are Neither Too Simple Nor Too Complex

Human infants, like immature members of any species, must be highly selective in sampling information from their environment to learn efficiently. Failure to be selective would waste precious computational resources on material that is already known (too simple) or unknowable (too complex). In two experiments with 7- and 8-month-olds, we measure infants’ visual attention to sequences of events varying in complexity, as determined by an ideal learner model. Infants’ probability of looking away was greatest on stimulus items whose complexity (negative log probability) according to the model was either very low or very high. These results suggest a principle of infant attention that may have broad applicability: infants implicitly seek to maintain intermediate rates of information absorption and avoid wasting cognitive resources on overly simple or overly complex events.

[1]  Steven T Piantadosi,et al.  Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  T. Florian Jaeger,et al.  Redundancy and reduction: Speakers manage syntactic information density , 2010, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  C. Rovee-Collier,et al.  Reactivation of infant memory. , 1980, Science.

[4]  B. Roder,et al.  Infants' Preferences for Familiarity and Novelty During the Course of Visual Processing. , 2000, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[5]  R. Tibshirani,et al.  Generalized Additive Models , 1986 .

[6]  E. R. Siqueland,et al.  Visual Reinforcement of Nonnutritive Sucking in Human Infants , 1969, Science.

[7]  A. Gottfried,et al.  FAMILIARITY AND NOVELTY PREFERENCES IN INFANT RECOGNITION MEMORY: IMPLICATIONS FOR INFORMATION PROCESSING , 1982 .

[8]  E. W. Ames,et al.  A multifactor model of infant preferences for novel and familiar stimuli. , 1988 .

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

[10]  David W. Hosmer,et al.  Applied Survival Analysis: Regression Modeling of Time-to-Event Data , 2008 .

[11]  P. V. Rao,et al.  Applied Survival Analysis: Regression Modeling of Time to Event Data , 2000 .

[12]  Sang Joon Kim,et al.  A Mathematical Theory of Communication , 2006 .

[13]  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.

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

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

[16]  Zsuzsa Kaldy,et al.  A new method for calibrating perceptual salience across dimensions in infants: the case of color vs. luminance. , 2006, Developmental science.

[17]  H. Akaike.  A new look at the statistical model identification , 1974 .

[18]  E. N. Solokov.  Perception and the conditioned reflex , 1963 .

[19]  Irene E. Nagel,et al.  Human Aging Magnifies Genetic Effects on Executive Functioning and Working Memory , 2008, Frontiers in human neuroscience.

[20]  A. Decasper,et al.  Of Human Bonding: Newborns Prefer Their Mothers' Voices , 1980 .

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

[22]  J Kagan,et al.  Infant attention to auditory discrepancy. , 1976, Child development.

[23]  Jodie A. Baird,et al.  Infants' On-line Segmentation of Dynamic Human Action , 2007 .

[24]  Marvin M. Chun,et al.  Babies and Brains: Habituation in Infant Cognition and Functional Neuroimaging , 2008, Frontiers in human neuroscience.

[25]  Eugene Charniak,et al.  Entropy Rate Constancy in Text , 2002, ACL.

[26]  W. N. Dember,et al.  Analysis of exploratory, manipulatory, and curiosity behaviors. , 1957, Psychological review.

[27]  Jessica Maye,et al.  Infant sensitivity to distributional information can affect phonetic discrimination , 2002, Cognition.

[28]  Robert S Siegler,et al.  Children's learning. , 2005, The American psychologist.

[29]  D. Spalding.  The Principles of Psychology , 1873, Nature.

[30]  Alice Turk,et al.  The Smooth Signal Redundancy Hypothesis: A Functional Explanation for Relationships between Redundancy, Prosodic Prominence, and Duration in Spontaneous Speech , 2004, Language and speech.

[31]  I. Langner.  Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data , 2006 .

[32]  Roger Levy,et al.  Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction , 2006, NIPS.

[33]  R. Yerkes,et al.  The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit‐formation , 1908 .

[34]  J. Klein,et al.  Survival Analysis: Techniques for Censored and Truncated Data , 1997 .

[35]  R N Aslin,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996, Science.

[36]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Statistical learning of tone sequences by human infants and adults , 1999, Cognition.

[37]  John Palmer,et al.  Relations Among Spontaneous Preferences, Familiarized Preferences, and Novelty Effects: Measurements With Forced-Choice Techniques. , 2005, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[38]  Geoffrey Hellman.  Structuralism , 2007, The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic.

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

[40]  Myron Tribus,et al.  Thermostatics and thermodynamics : an introduction to energy, information and states of matter, with engineering applications , 1961 .