Cited by 243Human-Animal Interaction StudiesFace Recognition and PerceptionEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

Baby schema in human and animal faces induces cuteness perception and gaze allocation in children

Open access
Borgi, Marta, Cogliati-Dezza, Irene, Brelsford, Victoria, Meints, Kerstin, Cirulli, Francesca·2014·Frontiers in Psychology

Abstract

The baby schema concept was originally proposed as a set of infantile traits with high appeal for humans, subsequently shown to elicit caretaking behavior and to affect cuteness perception and attentional processes. However, it is unclear whether the response to the baby schema may be extended to the human-animal bond context. Moreover, questions remain as to whether the cute response is constant and persistent or whether it changes with development. In the present study we parametrically manipulated the baby schema in images of humans, dogs, and cats. We analyzed responses of 3-6 year-old children, using both explicit (i.e., cuteness ratings) and implicit (i.e., eye gaze patterns) measures. By means of eye-tracking, we assessed children's preferential attention to images varying only for the degree of baby schema and explored participants' fixation patterns during a cuteness task. For comparative purposes, cuteness ratings were also obtained in a sample of adults. Overall our results show that the response to an infantile facial configuration emerges early during development. In children, the baby schema affects both cuteness perception and gaze allocation to infantile stimuli and to specific facial features, an effect not simply limited to human faces. In line with previous research, results confirm human positive appraisal toward animals and inform both educational and therapeutic interventions involving pets, helping to minimize risk factors (e.g., dog bites).

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 · 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00411

Cites

75 of 75 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?

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: 1

  1. Wilson E. (1984). Biophilia: The Human Bond With Other Species. Harvard, MA: Harvard University Press

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Borgi, M., Cogliati-Dezza, I., Brelsford, V., Meints, K., & Cirulli, F.
Affiliations
  • Istituto Superiore di Sanità (IT)
  • University of Lincoln (GB)
Corresponding author
Borgi, Marta
Venue
Frontiers in Psychology
Published
2014-05-07
Volume
5
Pages
411-411
ISSN
1664-1078 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1965734658
Cited by
243
References
75
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 22 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 38 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3
FWCI
8.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • Frontiers in Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Lincoln Repository (University of Lincoln) (acceptedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Dépôt institutionnel de l'Université libre de Bruxelles (Université Libre de Bruxelles) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • European Science Foundation (06-RNP-020)
  • European Social Fund
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Human-Animal Interaction Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
baby schema, cuteness perception, gaze allocation, children's attention, human-animal bond, dogs, cats, facial expressions, human-animal relations

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