Cited by 96Face Recognition and PerceptionEvolutionary Psychology and Human BehaviorInfant Health and Development

Human Infant Faces Provoke Implicit Positive Affective Responses in Parents and Non-Parents Alike

Open access
Senese, Vincenzo Paolo, De Falco, Simona, Bornstein, Marc H., Caria, Andrea, Buffolino, Simona, Venuti, Paola·2013·PLoS ONE

Abstract

Human infants' complete dependence on adult caregiving suggests that mechanisms associated with adult responsiveness to infant cues might be deeply embedded in the brain. Behavioural and neuroimaging research has produced converging evidence for adults' positive disposition to infant cues, but these studies have not investigated directly the valence of adults' reactions, how they are moderated by biological and social factors, and if they relate to child caregiving. This study examines implicit affective responses of 90 adults toward faces of human and non-human (cats and dogs) infants and adults. Implicit reactions were assessed with Single Category Implicit Association Tests, and reports of childrearing behaviours were assessed by the Parental Style Questionnaire. The results showed that human infant faces represent highly biologically relevant stimuli that capture attention and are implicitly associated with positive emotions. This reaction holds independent of gender and parenthood status and is associated with ideal parenting behaviors.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0080379

Cites

86 of 86 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?

  • Facial photographs of dogs and cats elicit cuteness perception from humans but do not highly activate the brain's reward system, unlike facial photographs of human babies.

    “those of dogs and cats elicit cuteness perception from humans but do not highly activate the brain's reward system [47,48].”

    From Are dark-eyed dogs favoured by humans? Domestication as a potential driver of iris colour difference between dogs and wolves (2023) · cites this paper as [48]

    The Introduction reports reward-related brain responses to human infant faces, and the Results find stronger positive implicit associations for human infant faces than for cat and dog faces. But the paper does not establish that cat and dog faces elicit cuteness perception or measure whether they activate the brain’s reward system; its comparison with animal faces was behavioural, not neural. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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: 3

  1. [5]Strathearn L (2007) Exploring the neurobiology of attachment. In: Mayes LC, Fonagy P, Target M, editors. Developmental science and psychoanalysis. London: Karnac Press. pp. 117–142.
  2. [60]Papoŭsek H, Papoŭsek M (2002) Intuitive parenting. In: Bornstein MH, Ed. Handbook of parenting: Vol. 2. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 183–203.
  3. [76]Sigel IE, McGillicuddy-De Lisi AV (2002) Parental beliefs and cognitions: The dynamic belief systems model. In Bornstein MH, Ed. Handbook of parenting. Vol. 3. 2nd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. pp. 485–508.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Senese, V. P., De Falco, S., Bornstein, M. H., Caria, A., Buffolino, S., & Venuti, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (IT)
  • National Institutes of Health (US)
  • University of Trento (IT)
Corresponding author
Senese, Vincenzo Paolo
Venue
PLoS ONE
Published
2013-11-25
Volume
8
Issue
11
Pages
e80379
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2011894461
Cited by
96
References
86
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2
FWCI
3.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, public-domain)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Institutional Research Information System (Università degli Studi di Trento) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institutes of Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Infant Health and Development
Keywords
infant faces, positive emotions, parental care, parental styles, dogs and cats, attentional capture, parental status, gender differences, implicit associations
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Behavior, Cats, Cues, Dogs, Face, Humans, Infant, Parents, Sex Factors

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