Do 12-month-old infants maintain expectations of contingent or non-contingent responding based on prior experiences with unfamiliar and familiar adults?

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-23
Author(s):  
Gunilla Stenberg

Abstract The current study examined whether infants use previous encounters for maintaining expectations for adults’ contingent responding. An unfamiliar adult responded contingently or non-contingently to infant signaling during an initial play situation and 10 min later presented an ambiguous toy while providing positive information (Experiment 1; forty-two 12-month-olds). The infants in the contingent group looked more at the adult during toy presentation and played more with the toy during the concluding free-play situation than the infants in the non-contingent group. When the parent had responded contingently or non-contingently to infant bids (Experiment 2; forty 12-month-olds), the infants in the contingent group tended to look more at the parent and tended to play more with the toy than did the infants in the non-contingent group. The results indicate that from just a brief exposure, infants form expectations about adults’ responsiveness and maintain these expectations of contingent/non-contingent responding from one situation to another.


2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (3) ◽  
pp. 795-806 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Short ◽  
Rachael Cooper Schindler ◽  
Rita Obeid ◽  
Maia M. Noeder ◽  
Laura E. Hlavaty ◽  
...  

Purpose Play is a critical aspect of children's development, and researchers have long argued that symbolic deficits in play may be diagnostic of developmental disabilities. This study examined whether deficits in play emerge as a function of developmental disabilities and whether our perceptions of play are colored by differences in language and behavioral presentations. Method Ninety-three children participated in this study (typically developing [TD]; n = 23, developmental language disorders [DLD]; n = 24, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder [ADHD]; n = 26, and autism spectrum disorder [ASD]; n = 20). Children were videotaped engaging in free-play. Children's symbolic play (imagination, organization, elaboration, and comfort) was scored under conditions of both audible language and no audible language to assess diagnostic group differences in play and whether audible language impacted raters' perception of play. Results Significant differences in play were evident across diagnostic groups. The presence of language did not alter play ratings for the TD group, but differences were found among the other diagnostic groups. When language was audible, children with DLD and ASD (but not ADHD) were scored poorly on play compared to their TD peers. When language was not audible, children with DLD were perceived to play better than when language was audible. Conversely, children with ADHD showed organizational deficits when language was not available to support their play. Finally, children with ASD demonstrated poor play performance regardless of whether language was audible or not. Conclusions Language affects our understanding of play skills in some young children. Parents, researchers, and clinicians must be careful not to underestimate or overestimate play based on language presentation. Differential skills in language have the potential to unduly influence our perceptions of play for children with developmental disabilities.





Derrida Today ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 22-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yifeng Sun

Deconstruction is decidedly unsettling in that it destabilizes the otherwise comfortably assumed understanding of the nature of translation. What is also controversial is that it may make translation impossible, considering that it explicitly acknowledges the impossibility of translation. Yet Derrida emphasizes the necessity of translation as well, thus foregrounding the need to negotiate with the non-negotiable, and for this reason, to translate the untranslatable. Deconstruction captures and elucidates the complexity of translation in relation to the variability and complexity of its nature and practice. Despite the disconcerting observation of his devastatingly relativist overtone and open-endedness, Derrida does not uphold complete free play, as is repeatedly pointed out by himself and other scholars. This paper argues that the context of translation plays a regulating role and intends to unravel what he calls translation as both possible and impossible, both respectful and abusive. Inspired by Derrida's profound contention that translation is in a way more about ‘what is not there’ than ‘what is there’, this paper will map some of the multiple implications of meaning and various modes of representation in translation, in which different meanings can be played with so as to give rise to spaces for exploring and expanding the range of translation strategies and methods.



2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vladimíra Hornáčková


2007 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 18-21 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Gray
Keyword(s):  


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erika Bonnevie ◽  
Sierra Smith ◽  
Caitlin Kummeth ◽  
Jaclyn Goldbarg ◽  
Joe Smyser


1999 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 493-508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen E. Rau ◽  
Donald V. Moser

This study examines whether personally performing other audit tasks can bias supervising seniors' going-concern judgments. During an audit, the senior performs some audit tasks him/herself and delegates other tasks to staff members. When personally performing an audit task, the senior would focus on the evidence related to that task. We predict that such evidence will have greater influence on the senior's subsequent going-concern judgment. The results of our experiment are consistent with our predictions. When provided with an identical set of information, seniors who performed another audit task for which the underlying facts of the case reflected positively (negatively) on the company's viability, subsequently made going-concern judgments that were relatively more positive (negative). Our results also demonstrate that the well-documented tendency of auditors to attend more to negative information does not always dominate auditors' information processing. Subjects who performed the task for which the underlying facts reflected positively on the company's viability directed their attention to such positive information and, consequently, both their memory and judgments were more positive than those of subjects in the other conditions. Recent findings indicating that biases in seniors' going-concern judgments may not be fully offset in the review process are discussed along with other potential implications of our results.



2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katherine Ryker ◽  
◽  
Karen S. McNeal ◽  
Rachel Atkins ◽  
Nicole LaDue ◽  
...  


2019 ◽  
Vol 43 (3) ◽  
pp. 96-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic D.P. Johnson ◽  
Dominic Tierney

A major puzzle in international relations is why states privilege negative over positive information. States tend to inflate threats, exhibit loss aversion, and learn more from failures than from successes. Rationalist accounts fail to explain this phenomenon, because systematically overweighting bad over good may in fact undermine state interests. New research in psychology, however, offers an explanation. The “negativity bias” has emerged as a fundamental principle of the human mind, in which people's response to positive and negative information is asymmetric. Negative factors have greater effects than positive factors across a wide range of psychological phenomena, including cognition, motivation, emotion, information processing, decision-making, learning, and memory. Put simply, bad is stronger than good. Scholars have long pointed to the role of positive biases, such as overconfidence, in causing war, but negative biases are actually more pervasive and may represent a core explanation for patterns of conflict. Positive and negative dispositions apply in different contexts. People privilege negative information about the external environment and other actors, but positive information about themselves. The coexistence of biases can increase the potential for conflict. Decisionmakers simultaneously exaggerate the severity of threats and exhibit overconfidence about their capacity to deal with them. Overall, the negativity bias is a potent force in human judgment and decisionmaking, with important implications for international relations theory and practice.



Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document