CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 48Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentVisual perception and processing mechanismsAction Observation and Synchronization

Trajectory discrimination and peripersonal space perception in newborns

Open access
Orioli, Giulia, Filippetti, Maria Laura, Gerbino, Walter, Dragovic, Danica, Farroni, Teresa·2018·Infancy
DOI 10.1111/infa.12207PMC PMC5836937
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The ability to discriminate the trajectories of moving objects is highly adaptive and fundamental for physical and social interactions. Therefore, we could reasonably expect sensitivity to different trajectories already at birth, as a precursor of later communicative and defensive abilities. To investigate this possibility, we measured newborns' looking behavior to evaluate their ability to discriminate between visual stimuli depicting motion along different trajectories happening within the space surrounding their body. Differently from previous studies, we did not take into account defensive reactions, which may not be elicited by impending collision as newborns might not categorize approaching stimuli as possible dangers. In two experiments, we showed that newborns display a spontaneous visual preference for trajectories directed toward their body. We found this visual preference when visual stimuli depicted motion in opposite directions (approaching vs. receding) as well as when they both moved toward the peripersonal space and differed only in their specific target (i.e., the body vs. the space around it). These findings suggest that at birth human infants seem to be already equipped with visual mechanisms predisposing them to perceive their presence in the environment and to adaptively focus their attention on the peripersonal space and their bodily self.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/infa.12207

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Developmental studies show an early predisposition to stimuli processing in PPS in newborns or first-year infants.

    “Developmental studies also show the existence of early predisposition to stimuli processing in the PPS in newborns or in first-year infants”

    From The Peripersonal Space in a social world (2021) · cites this paper as Orioli, Filippetti, Gerbino, Dragovic, & Farroni, 2018

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 30

  1. Abrams, R. A., & Christ, S. E. (2005). The onset of receding motion captures attention: Comment on Franconeri and Simons (2003). Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 219– 223. 15971686
  2. Abrams, R. A., & Christ, S. E. (2006). Motion onset captures attention: A rejoinder to Franconeri and Simons (2005). Perception & Psychophysics, 68(1), 114– 117. 16617835
  3. Ball, W., & Tronick, E. (1971). Infant responses to impending collision: Optical and real. Science, 171, 818– 820. 5541165
  4. Banks, M. S., & Ginsburg, A. P. (1985). Infant visual preferences: A review and new theoretical treatment In Reese H. W. (Ed.), Advances in child development and behavior (pp. 207– 246). New York, NY: Academic. 3911754
  5. Barbu‐Roth, M., Anderson, D. I., Desprès, A., Provasi, J., Cabrol, D., & Campos, J. J. (2009). Neonatal stepping in relation to terrestrial optic flow. Child Development, 80(1), 8– 14. 19236388 PMC2709813
  6. Barbu‐Roth, M., Anderson, D. I., Desprès, A., Streeter, R. J., Cabrol, D., Trujillo, M., … & Provasi, J. (2014). Air stepping in response to optic flows that move Toward and Away from the neonate. Developmental Psychobiology, 56(5), 1142– 1149. 24604519
  7. Cappe, C., Thut, G., Romei, V., & Murray, M. M. (2009). Selective integration of auditory‐visual looming cues by humans. Neuropsychologia, 47, 1045– 1052. 19041883
  8. de Vignemont, F., & Iannetti, G. D. (2015). How many peripersonal spaces? Neuropsychologia, 70, 327– 334. 25448854
  9. Fantz, R. L. (1956). A method for studying early visual development. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 6(1), 13– 15.
  10. Fantz, R. L., Ordy, J. M., & Udelf, M. S. (1962). Maturation of pattern vision in infants during the first six months. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55, 907– 917.
  11. Farroni, T., Menon, E., Rigato, S., & Johnson, M. H. (2007). The perception of facial expressions in newborns. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 4(1), 2– 13. 20228970 PMC2836746
  12. Franconeri, S. L., & Simons, D. J. (2003). Moving and looming stimuli capture attention. Perception & Psychophysics, 65(7), 999– 1010. 14674628
  13. Franconeri, S. L., & Simons, D. J. (2005). The dynamic events that capture visual attention: A reply to Abrams and Christ (2005). Perception & Psychophysics, 67, 962– 966. 16396005
  14. Ghazanfar, A. A., Neuhoff, J. G., & Logothetis, N. K. (2002). Auditory looming perception in rhesus monkeys. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 99, 15755– 15757. 12429855 PMC137788
  15. Howard, I. P., & Rogers, B. J. (2008). Seeing in depth In Howard I. P., & Rogers B. J., Seeing in Depth. (2: Depth Perception, pp. 519– 541). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  16. Johnson, M. H., Senju, A., & Tomalski, P. (2015). The two‐process theory of face processing: Modifications based on two decades of data from infants and adults. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 50, 169– 179. 25454353
  17. Jouen, F., Lepecq, J. C., Gapenne, O., & Bertenthal, B. I. (2000). Optic flow sensitivity in neonates. Infant Behavior and Development, 23(3), 271‐ 284.
  18. Kandula, M., Hofman, D., & Dijkerman, H. C. (2015). Visuo‐tactile interactions are dependent of the predictive value of the visual stimulus. Neuropsychologia, 70, 358– 366. 25498404
  19. Kayed, N. S., & van der Meer, A. L. (2007). Infants' timing strategies to optical collisions: A longitudinal study. Infant Behavior and Development, 30(1), 50– 59. 17292779
  20. Lakusta, L., & DiFabrizio, S. (2017). And, the winner is… A visual preference for endpoints over starting points in intants' motion event representations. Infancy, 22, 323– 343. 33158354
  21. Neuhoff, J. G. (1998). Perceptual bias for rising tones. Nature, 395(6698), 123– 124. 9744266
  22. Rosenblum, L. D., Carello, C., & Pastore, R. E. (1987). Relative effectiveness of three stimulus variables for locating a moving sound source. Perception, 16, 175– 186. 3684479
  23. Rosenblum, L. D., Wuestefeld, A. P., & Saldaña, H. M. (1993). Auditory looming perception: Influences on anticipatory judgments. Perception, 22, 1467– 1482. 8090622
  24. Schmuckler, M. A., Collimore, L. M., & Dannemiller, J. L. (2007). Infants' reactions to object collision on hit and miss trajectories. Infancy, 12(1), 105– 118. 33412729
  25. Seifritz, E., Neuhoff, J. G., Bilecen, D., Scheffler, K., Mustovic, H., Schächinger, H., … & Di Salle, F. (2002). Neural processing of auditory looming in the human brain. Current Biology, 12, 2147– 2151. 12498691
  26. Vagnoni, E., Lourenco, S. F., & Longo, M. R. (2012). Threat modulates perception of looming visual stimuli. Current Biology, 22(19), R826– R827. 23058796
  27. van der Meer, A. L., Svantesson, M., & van der Weel, F. R. (2012). Longitudinal study of looming in infants with high‐density EEG. Developmental Neuroscience, 34, 488– 501. 23258077
  28. Van der Stoep, N., Nijboera, T. C. W., Van der Stigchel, S., & Spence, C. (2015). Multisensory interactions in the depth plane in front and rear space: A review. Neuropsychologia, 70, 335– 349. 25498407
  29. van der Weel, F. R., & van der Meer, A. L. (2009). Seeing it coming: Infants' brain responses to looming danger. Naturwissenschaften, 96, 1385– 1391. 19756463
  30. Yonas, A. (1981). Infants' responses to optical information for collision In Aslin R. N., Alberts J. R., & Petersen M. R. (Eds.), Development of perception (vol. 2, pp. 313– 334). New York, NY: Academic Press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Orioli, G., Filippetti, M. L., Gerbino, W., Dragovic, D., & Farroni, T.
Affiliations
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • University College London (GB)
  • University of Trieste (IT)
  • Ospedale di Monfalcone (IT)
Corresponding author
Orioli, Giulia
ORCID
Venue
Infancy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-08-23
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
252-267
ISSN
  • 1525-0008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7078
DOI
10.1111/infa.12207
PMC
PMC5836937
OpenAlex
W2746086625
Cited by
48
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 33 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
19.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Infancy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Open Access at Essex (University of Essex) (acceptedVersion)
  • ArTS Archivio della ricerca di Trieste (University of Trieste https://www.units.it/) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • University of Birmingham Research Portal (University of Birmingham) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust (073985/Z/03/Z)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
Keywords
peripersonal space, neonates, infant visual preference, viewing behavior, motion perception, body schema, self-awareness, defensive reactions, attentional focus

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review