Predictive reaching for moving objects by human infants☆
References (11)
Some examples of programmed limb movements
Brain Research
(1974)Intermediate correlational methods
(1964)- et al.
The continuity of movements
- et al.
Visually preadapted constituents of manipulatory action
Perception
(1972) Study of prehension in infants
Genetic Psychology Monographs
(1931)
Cited by (205)
Evolutionary perspective on peripersonal space and perception
2023, Cognitive Archaeology, Body Cognition, and the Evolution of Visuospatial PerceptionEffects of visual and visual-haptic perception of material rigidity on reaching and grasping in the course of development
2021, Acta PsychologicaCitation Excerpt :Reaching and grasping movements are purposeful goal-directed actions that require the planning and prediction of movements, as well as the perception of object properties (Von Hofsten & Lindhagen, 1979). From the very beginning of life the grasping movements of infants are prospective and goal-directed (Bruner & Koslowski, 1972; Von Hofsten, 1980, 2004), and at the end of the first year of life they are adjusted to object size, distance, shape, texture, weight and spatial orientation (Barrett et al., 2008; Gottfried & Rose, 1980; Libertus et al., 2013; Molina & Jouen, 2003; Newell et al., 1989; Newman et al., 2001; Paulus & Hauf, 2011; Ransburg et al., 2017; Ruff, 1984; Siddiqui, 1995). However, much less is known about the effect of material rigidity on reaching and grasping in infants.
Increased visual interest and affective responses to impossible figures in early infancy
2019, Infant Behavior and DevelopmentCitation Excerpt :Piaget (1954) suggested that mental representations of objects in pre-reaching and pre-crawling infants were not available, though later studies using looking duration demonstrated young infants’ abilities to perceive and recognize familiar vs. novel patterns and objects (Fagan, 1970; Fantz, 1964). Others report that young infants can also perceive object unity as well as make anticipatory saccades and reaches toward an object moving through occlusion, which indicate the presence of emerging object representations (Bower, Broughton, & Moore, 1971; Johnson, Amso, & Slemmer, 2003; Munakata, McClelland, Johnson, & Siegler, 1997; von Hofsten, 1980; von Hofsten, Kochukhova, & Rosander, 2007). Increased looking at impossible events involving real 3D objects undergoing scenarios of occlusion, collision, containment, covering, and support have been reported in young infants (Baillargeon, Spelke, & Wasserman, 1985; Baillargeon, 1987; Hespos & Baillargeon, 2001; Spelke, Breinlinger, Macomber, & Jacobson, 1992; Wang, Baillargeon, & Brueckner, 2004; Wang, Baillargeon, & Paterson, 2005), and researchers have attributed this to infants being surprised or puzzled by the visual displays that go against their inherent expectations and existing knowledge (1994b, Baillargeon, 1994a, 2004).
The Development of Sensorimotor Intelligence in Infants
2018, Advances in Child Development and BehaviorCitation Excerpt :Infants as young as 18 weeks of age were able to catch an object moving at 30 cm/sec. Further work showed that the reaches were aimed at the meeting point with the object and not toward the position where the object was seen at the beginning of the reach (von Hofsten, 1980). As a result, infants were very successful in catching the moving object. von Hofsten (1983)
Cognition–Action Trade-Offs Reflect Organization of Attention in Infancy
2018, Advances in Child Development and Behavior
- ☆
Funds for this investigation were provided by grants to the author from the Swedish Council for Research in the Humanities and Social Sciences.