Can a Nonspecific Bias Toward Top-Heavy Patterns Explain Newborns' Face Preference?

344 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Infants deploy selective attention to the mouth of a talking face when learning speech (2012, background): “For example, even though newborns do not respond to faces as communicatively and socially meaningful objects (12), they look more at the eye region (13).”
Social learning and social cognition: The case for pedagogy (2006, background): “…face configuration, or is determined by the number of elements in the upper and lower parts of the stimuli (Turati, Simion, Milian, & Umiltà, 2002; Cassia, Turati, & Simion, 2004), they should show preference for upright face configurations even if the contrast polarity of these stimuli are…”
The fusiform face area: a cortical region specialized for the perception of faces (2006, background): “On the other hand, at least some aspects of face perception appear to be innately specified, as infants less than 24 h old preferentially track schematic faces compared with visually similar scrambled or inverted faces ( Johnson et al. 1991; Cassia et al. 2004).”
Developmental deficits in social perception in autism: the role of the amygdala and fusiform face area (2005, background): “Although this preference might very well be due to more general constraints in the newborn visual system (Kleiner and Banks, 1987; Cassia et al., 2004), it does not alter the fact that infants seem geared to accumulate experience with faces.”