Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32748567›Full record

ArticleInfancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies2020

Explaining individual differences in infant visual sensory seeking.

Elena Serena Piccardi, Mark H Johnson, Teodora Gliga

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Explaining individual differences in infant visual sensory seeking.Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies · 2020
    Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elena Serena PiccardiCentre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-5071-347X
Mark H JohnsonCentre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK.
Teodora GligaCentre for Brain and Cognitive Development, Birkbeck University of London, London, UK.

Funding

Medical Research Council G0701484Medical Research Council MR/T003057/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual differences in infants' engagement with their environment manifest early in development and are noticed by parents. Three views have been advanced to explain differences in seeking novel stimulation. The optimal stimulation hypothesis suggests that individuals seek further stimulation when they are under-responsive to current sensory input. The processing speed hypothesis proposes that those capable of processing information faster are driven to seek stimulation more frequently. The information prioritization hypothesis suggests the differences in stimulation seeking index variation in the prioritization of incoming relative to ongoing information processing. Ten-month-old infants saw 10 repetitions of a video clip and changes in frontal theta oscillatory amplitude were measured as an index of information processing speed. Stimulus-locked P1 peak amplitude in response to checkerboards briefly overlaid on the video at random points during its presentation indexed processing of incoming stimulation. Parental report of higher visual seeking did not relate to reduced P1 peak amplitude or to a stronger decrease in frontal theta amplitude with repetition, thus not supporting either the optimal stimulation or the processing speed hypotheses. Higher visual seeking occurred in those infants whose P1 peak amplitude was greater than expected based on their theta amplitude. These findings indicate that visual sensory seeking in infancy is explained by a bias toward novel stimulation, thus supporting the information prioritization hypothesis.

Indexed as

IndividualityEvoked Potentials, VisualFemaleFrontal LobeHumansInfantInfant BehaviorMalePattern Recognition, VisualTheta RhythmVisual Perception

Identifiers

PMID32748567
PMCPMC7496506

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.