Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40867378›Full record

ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Strike a Pose: Relationships Between Infants' Motor Development and Visuospatial Representations of Bodies.

Emma L Axelsson, Tayla Britton, Gurmeher K Gulhati, Chloe Kelly, Helen Copeland, Luca McNamara, Hester Covell, Alyssa A Quinn

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Emma L AxelssonSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle Australia, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-6038-6254
Tayla BrittonSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle Australia, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0009-0009-2709-6149
Gurmeher K GulhatiSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle Australia, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
Chloe KellySchool of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Helen CopelandSchool of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Luca McNamaraSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle Australia, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.
Hester CovellSchool of Medicine and Psychology, College of Science and Medicine, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 2601, Australia.
Alyssa A QuinnSchool of Psychological Sciences, College of Engineering, Science and Environment, University of Newcastle Australia, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia.ORCID 0009-0008-8359-4719

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Infants discriminate faces early in the first year, but research on infants' discrimination of bodies is plagued by mixed findings. Using a familiarisation novelty preference method, we investigated 7- and 9-month-old infants' discrimination of body postures presented in upright and inverted orientations, and with and without heads, along with relationships with gross and fine motor development. In our initial studies, 7-month-old infants discriminated upright headless postures with forward-facing and about-facing images. Eye tracking revealed that infants looked at the bodies of the upright headless postures the longest and at the heads of upright whole figures for 60-70% of the time regardless of the presence of faces, suggesting that heads detract attention from bodies. In a more stringent test, with similarly complex limb positions between test items, infants could not discriminate postures. With longer trials, the 7-month-olds demonstrated a familiarity preference for the upright whole figures, and the 9-month-olds demonstrated a novelty preference, albeit with a less robust effect. Unlike previous studies, we found that better gross motor skills were related to the 7-month-olds' better discrimination of upright headless postures compared to inverted postures. The 9-month-old infants' lower gross and fine motor skills were associated with a stronger preference for inverted compared to upright whole figures. This is further evidence of a configural representation of bodies in infancy, but it is constrained by an upper bias (heads in upright figures, feet in inverted), the test item similarity, and the trial duration. The measure and type of motor development reveals differential relationships with infants' representations of bodies.

Indexed as

body representationseye trackinginfant cognitioninversion effectmotor development

Identifiers

PMID40867378
PMCPMC12383127

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.