1
|
Sirois S, Brisson J, Blaser E, Calignano G, Donenfeld J, Hepach R, Hochmann JR, Kaldy Z, Liszkowski U, Mayer M, Ross-Sheehy S, Russo S, Valenza E. The pupil collaboration: A multi-lab, multi-method analysis of goal attribution in infants. Infant Behav Dev 2023; 73:101890. [PMID: 37944367 DOI: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2023.101890] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/09/2022] [Revised: 09/27/2023] [Accepted: 09/27/2023] [Indexed: 11/12/2023]
Abstract
The rise of pupillometry in infant research over the last decade is associated with a variety of methods for data preprocessing and analysis. Although pupil diameter is increasingly recognized as an alternative measure of the popular cumulative looking time approach used in many studies (Jackson & Sirois, 2022), an open question is whether the many approaches used to analyse this variable converge. To this end, we proposed a crowdsourced approach to pupillometry analysis. A dataset from 30 9-month-old infants (15 girls; Mage = 282.9 days, SD = 8.10) was provided to 7 distinct teams for analysis. The data were obtained from infants watching video sequences showing a hand, initially resting between two toys, grabbing one of them (after Woodward, 1998). After habituation, infants were shown (in random order) a sequence of four test events that varied target position and target toy. Results show that looking times reflect primarily the familiar path of the hand, regardless of target toy. Gaze data similarly show this familiarity effect of path. The pupil dilation analyses show that features of pupil baseline measures (duration and temporal location) as well as data retention variation (trial and/or participant) due to different inclusion criteria from the various analysis methods are linked to divergences in findings. Two of the seven teams found no significant findings, whereas the remaining five teams differ in the pattern of findings for main and interaction effects. The discussion proposes guidelines for best practice in the analysis of pupillometry data.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sylvain Sirois
- Département de Psychologie, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières, Canada.
| | - Julie Brisson
- Centre de Recherche sur les fonctionnements et dysfonctionnements psychologiques (EA7475), Université de Rouen Normandie, France
| | - Erik Blaser
- Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
| | - Giulia Calignano
- Department of Developmental and Social Psychology, University of Padova, Italy
| | - Jamie Donenfeld
- Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
| | - Robert Hepach
- Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK
| | - Jean-Rémy Hochmann
- CNRS UMR5229 - Institut des Sciences Cognitives Marc Jeannerod, Université Lyon 1, France
| | - Zsuzsa Kaldy
- Department of Psychology, University of Massachusetts Boston, USA
| | - Ulf Liszkowski
- Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Hamburg, Germany
| | - Marlena Mayer
- Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Hamburg, Germany
| | | | - Sofia Russo
- Department of Developmental and Social Psychology, University of Padova, Italy
| | - Eloisa Valenza
- Department of Developmental and Social Psychology, University of Padova, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Schubotz RI, Ebel SJ, Elsner B, Weiss PH, Wörgötter F. Tool mastering today - an interdisciplinary perspective. Front Psychol 2023; 14:1191792. [PMID: 37397285 PMCID: PMC10311916 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1191792] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/22/2023] [Accepted: 05/19/2023] [Indexed: 07/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Tools have coined human life, living conditions, and culture. Recognizing the cognitive architecture underlying tool use would allow us to comprehend its evolution, development, and physiological basis. However, the cognitive underpinnings of tool mastering remain little understood in spite of long-time research in neuroscientific, psychological, behavioral and technological fields. Moreover, the recent transition of tool use to the digital domain poses new challenges for explaining the underlying processes. In this interdisciplinary review, we propose three building blocks of tool mastering: (A) perceptual and motor abilities integrate to tool manipulation knowledge, (B) perceptual and cognitive abilities to functional tool knowledge, and (C) motor and cognitive abilities to means-end knowledge about tool use. This framework allows for integrating and structuring research findings and theoretical assumptions regarding the functional architecture of tool mastering via behavior in humans and non-human primates, brain networks, as well as computational and robotic models. An interdisciplinary perspective also helps to identify open questions and to inspire innovative research approaches. The framework can be applied to studies on the transition from classical to modern, non-mechanical tools and from analogue to digital user-tool interactions in virtual reality, which come with increased functional opacity and sensorimotor decoupling between tool user, tool, and target. By working towards an integrative theory on the cognitive architecture of the use of tools and technological assistants, this review aims at stimulating future interdisciplinary research avenues.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricarda I. Schubotz
- Department of Biological Psychology, Institute for Psychology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Sonja J. Ebel
- Human Biology & Primate Cognition, Institute of Biology, Leipzig University, Leipzig, Germany
- Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Birgit Elsner
- Developmental Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Peter H. Weiss
- Cognitive Neurology, Department of Neurology, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
- Institute of Neuroscience and Medicine (INM-3), Forschungszentrum Jülich, Jülich, Germany
| | - Florentin Wörgötter
- Inst. of Physics 3 and Bernstein Center for Computational Neuroscience, Georg August University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Albarracin M, Pitliya RJ. Situated models and the modeler: A comment on "The Markov blanket trick: On the scope of the free energy principle and active inference" by Raja, Valluri, Baggs, Chemero and Anderson. Phys Life Rev 2022; 43:4-6. [PMID: 35930909 DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2022.07.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2022] [Accepted: 07/19/2022] [Indexed: 12/15/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Mahault Albarracin
- Université du Québec a Montréal, Faculté des arts et des sciences - Département d'informatique et de recherche opérationnelle, 3150 Jean Brillant St, Montreal, H3T 1N8, Quebec, Canada; VERSES, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
| | - Riddhi J Pitliya
- VERSES, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Butz MV. Resourceful Event-Predictive Inference: The Nature of Cognitive Effort. Front Psychol 2022; 13:867328. [PMID: 35846607 PMCID: PMC9280204 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.867328] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2022] [Accepted: 04/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/29/2022] Open
Abstract
Pursuing a precise, focused train of thought requires cognitive effort. Even more effort is necessary when more alternatives need to be considered or when the imagined situation becomes more complex. Cognitive resources available to us limit the cognitive effort we can spend. In line with previous work, an information-theoretic, Bayesian brain approach to cognitive effort is pursued: to solve tasks in our environment, our brain needs to invest information, that is, negative entropy, to impose structure, or focus, away from a uniform structure or other task-incompatible, latent structures. To get a more complete formalization of cognitive effort, a resourceful event-predictive inference model (REPI) is introduced, which offers computational and algorithmic explanations about the latent structure of our generative models, the active inference dynamics that unfold within, and the cognitive effort required to steer the dynamics-to, for example, purposefully process sensory signals, decide on responses, and invoke their execution. REPI suggests that we invest cognitive resources to infer preparatory priors, activate responses, and anticipate action consequences. Due to our limited resources, though, the inference dynamics are prone to task-irrelevant distractions. For example, the task-irrelevant side of the imperative stimulus causes the Simon effect and, due to similar reasons, we fail to optimally switch between tasks. An actual model implementation simulates such task interactions and offers first estimates of the involved cognitive effort. The approach may be further studied and promises to offer deeper explanations about why we get quickly exhausted from multitasking, how we are influenced by irrelevant stimulus modalities, why we exhibit magnitude interference, and, during social interactions, why we often fail to take the perspective of others into account.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Martin V. Butz
- Neuro-Cognitive Modeling Group, Department of Computer Science, University of Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany
- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Science, University of Tübingen, Tubingen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Adam M, Gumbsch C, Butz MV, Elsner B. The Impact of Action Effects on Infants' Predictive Gaze Shifts for a Non-Human Grasping Action at 7, 11, and 18 Months. Front Psychol 2021; 12:695550. [PMID: 34447336 PMCID: PMC8382717 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.695550] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/15/2021] [Accepted: 07/16/2021] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
During the observation of goal-directed actions, infants usually predict the goal at an earlier age when the agent is familiar (e.g., human hand) compared to unfamiliar (e.g., mechanical claw). These findings implicate a crucial role of the developing agentive self for infants’ processing of others’ action goals. Recent theoretical accounts suggest that predictive gaze behavior relies on an interplay between infants’ agentive experience (top-down processes) and perceptual information about the agent and the action-event (bottom-up information; e.g., agency cues). The present study examined 7-, 11-, and 18-month-old infants’ predictive gaze behavior for a grasping action performed by an unfamiliar tool, depending on infants’ age-related action knowledge about tool-use and the display of the agency cue of producing a salient action effect. The results are in line with the notion of a systematic interplay between experience-based top-down processes and cue-based bottom-up information: Regardless of the salient action effect, predictive gaze shifts did not occur in the 7-month-olds (least experienced age group), but did occur in the 18-month-olds (most experienced age group). In the 11-month-olds, however, predictive gaze shifts occurred only when a salient action effect was presented. This sheds new light on how the developing agentive self, in interplay with available agency cues, supports infants’ action-goal prediction also for observed tool-use actions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maurits Adam
- Developmental Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| | - Christian Gumbsch
- Neuro-Cognitive Modeling, Department of Computer Science and Department of Psychology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany.,Autonomous Learning Group, Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems, Stuttgart, Germany
| | - Martin V Butz
- Neuro-Cognitive Modeling, Department of Computer Science and Department of Psychology, University of Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Birgit Elsner
- Developmental Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
| |
Collapse
|