ReviewInfant behavior & development2025
A quarter century of research on infant contingency learning: Current and future directions.
Review in Infant behavior & development, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Effects of Gahvora Cradling on Learning, Motor Behavior, and Expression of Affect in 3-Month-Olds in Tajikistan.Brain sciences · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Although traditional learning paradigms provided a substantial base for the emergence of the field of infant studies from the 1960s through the 1990s, research on contingency (operant) learning in infancy has not attracted much attention over the last 25 years. While the reasons for such neglect are unclear, learning protocols offer valuable contributions to the field of infant studies, spanning basic research, translational work, and application. An examination of the literature over the last quarter century shows operant learning concepts in use with respect to the development of agency, goal blockage reactivity, clinical cross-group comparisons, and developmental interventions. Building upon the foundation that infants are capable of contingency learning, research has explored underlying mechanisms, including coordinated movement dynamics and psychobiological correlates. Methodological innovations-such as novel paradigms and cutting-edge techniques like motion capture, eye-tracking, and computational modeling-have further refined our understanding of these processes. Efforts have also focused on identifying conditions that promote learning and factors contributing to data loss. An overarching question remains whether infants demonstrate agency during contingency learning. Additionally, recent research has shifted from a primarily experimental group approach to considering individual differences in early learning. However, it is unclear whether traditional learning metrics effectively capture nonmonotonic behavioral change and variability in learning patterns. The review offers cogent rationales for reintegrating these paradigms into the field of infant studies, discusses gaps in the literature that should be addressed for this goal to be realized, and proposes future directions for advancing the field.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.