ogether, theseresults revealed that infants learned and remembered thecolours on both sides of the screens during orientationbut used the agent’s perceptions, which included only theback of the screens, to predict and interpret her actionsduring test, even when the agent’s perceptions differedfrom their own

In the current studies, infants aged 9 months and older re-sponded differently and appropriately when the experimenter wasunwilling to give them a toy (with impatience) as compared withwhen she was trying to give them a toy (with patience)— eventhough they did not actually receive the toy in either case.

test

When 9-month-old infants saw an actor graspan object, they focused on the object that wasgrasped more than other details of the event

The major finding of this study is that infants as young as 2months of age can categorize spectrally dissimilar vowels pho-netically.

That is, young infants discriminate the place of articulation contrasts according to linguistic category without spe­cific linguistic experience, whereas adult speech perceptual ability is more limited, reflecting discrimination of only those contrasts which are phonemic in the listener's native language

"head turn"

looking time

One is thatinfants recognize the event in terms of physicalcausality, that is, in accord with the contact prin-ciple. If this is the case, the looking time ofinfants for the no-contact event should belonger than that for the contact event. Theother possibility is that infants recognize theevent in terms of the voluntary action ofpeople. If so, infants should respond similarly tothe two events, as in Woodward et a

We predicted that ifinfants noticed how much each box compressed theplatform and could infer—by applying the weight-compression rule—which box was lighter andwhich was heavier, then they should again reachprospectively for the lighter box.

preferential-reaching tasks:

inanimate-control condition

A first predictionwas that 9-month-olds would give evidence of sensitivity tofairness if presented with a 2:0 violation. Experiments 1 and 2both tested this prediction, using slightly different proceduresthat made possible different control conditions. A secondprediction, tested in Experiment 3, was that 9-month-olds wouldsucceed in detecting a 2:0 but not a 3:1 violation. Finally, a thirdprediction was that infants younger than 9 months might alsosucceed in detecting a 2:0 violation.

we predicted that infants would view themas inanimate penguin-shaped toys, would hold no expectationsabout how the experimenter would divide the cookies betweenthem, and hence would look about equally at the equal andunequal events

Clearly, neither theimmaturity of their brain nor theirinability to talk limits how longyoung infants can remember anevent.

The data support theexpectation that infant have long term memory for a socialstressor over the recall interval.

We expected thatinfants in the experimental condition would exhibit evidence formemory for the FFSF both at physiological and behavioral levelscompared to age-matched control infants

infants’ states

Four levels of mouth–tongue movements

frequency and the duration ofmfants' mouth c^enmgs and tongue protru-sions