TY - JOUR
T1 - How Visual is Visual Prediction?
AU - Emberson, Lauren L.
AU - Rizzieri, Ashley
AU - Aslin, Richard N.
N1 - Funding Information:
First and foremost, thank you to all the infants and caregivers who volunteered their time to participate in the current study! Thank you to Holly Palmeri for your amazing help, as always. Thank you to Dan Swingley for feedback on these findings and palette introductions. This work was funded by NICHD (K99 HD076166-01A1/ 4R00HD076166-02) and a Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) postdoctoral fellowship to (to L.L.E.), and NIH Grant R01 HD-37082 and NSF EAGER BCS-1514351 (to R.N.A.).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © International Congress of Infant Studies (ICIS)
PY - 2017/11/1
Y1 - 2017/11/1
N2 - Infants are readily able to use their recent experience to shape their future behavior. Recent work has confirmed that infants generate neural predictions based on their recent experience (Emberson, Richards, & Aslin, 2015) and that neural predictions trigger visual system activity similar to that elicited by visual stimulation. This study uses behavioral methods to ask, how visual is visual prediction? In Experiment 1, we confirmed that when additional trials provide additional visual experience with the experimental shape, infants exhibit a robust novelty preference. In Experiment 2, we removed the visual stimulus from some trials and presented the predictive auditory cue alone, allowing the effects of neural prediction to be assessed. We found no evidence of looking preferences at test, suggesting that visual prediction does not contribute to the computation of visual familiarity. In Experiment 3, we provided infants with a degraded visual stimulus to test whether visual prediction could bias visual perception under ambiguous conditions. Again, we found no evidence of looking preferences at test, suggesting that visual prediction is not biasing perception of an uncertain stimulus. Overall, our results suggest that visual prediction is not visual, in the strictest sense, despite the presence of visual system activation.
AB - Infants are readily able to use their recent experience to shape their future behavior. Recent work has confirmed that infants generate neural predictions based on their recent experience (Emberson, Richards, & Aslin, 2015) and that neural predictions trigger visual system activity similar to that elicited by visual stimulation. This study uses behavioral methods to ask, how visual is visual prediction? In Experiment 1, we confirmed that when additional trials provide additional visual experience with the experimental shape, infants exhibit a robust novelty preference. In Experiment 2, we removed the visual stimulus from some trials and presented the predictive auditory cue alone, allowing the effects of neural prediction to be assessed. We found no evidence of looking preferences at test, suggesting that visual prediction does not contribute to the computation of visual familiarity. In Experiment 3, we provided infants with a degraded visual stimulus to test whether visual prediction could bias visual perception under ambiguous conditions. Again, we found no evidence of looking preferences at test, suggesting that visual prediction is not biasing perception of an uncertain stimulus. Overall, our results suggest that visual prediction is not visual, in the strictest sense, despite the presence of visual system activation.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85020059085&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85020059085&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/infa.12188
DO - 10.1111/infa.12188
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85020059085
SN - 1525-0008
VL - 22
SP - 748
EP - 761
JO - Infancy
JF - Infancy
IS - 6
ER -