IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v8y2018i2p2158244018784993.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Infants’ Visual Preferences for Prosocial Behavior and Other-Race Characters at 6 Months: An Eye-Tracking Study

Author

Listed:
  • Claire Holvoet
  • Thomas Arciszewski
  • Céline Scola
  • Delphine Picard

Abstract

There is growing evidence that infants display preferences for prosocial agents. However, recent studies have reported conflicting results about the impact of appearance on these preferences. The current study investigated the relative influence of behavior and face/race on 6-month-old infants’ evaluation of social agents when these two aspects are in competition. In a short research study featuring animated cartoons where agents interacted in a ball game, we used eye-tracking methodology to assess infants’ preferences (a) for prosocial behavior, (b) for one kind of appearance, represented by race, and (c) when the two aspects were pitted against one another. The two control conditions revealed preferences for prosocial agents and for other-race appearance. No preference could be found at group level in the third condition, where these two aspects competed with each other. However, a profile analysis revealed that when this situation was a source of conflict in terms of the preferences identified in the control conditions, infants prioritized appearance over behavior.

Suggested Citation

  • Claire Holvoet & Thomas Arciszewski & Céline Scola & Delphine Picard, 2018. "Infants’ Visual Preferences for Prosocial Behavior and Other-Race Characters at 6 Months: An Eye-Tracking Study," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(2), pages 21582440187, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018784993
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244018784993
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244018784993
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244018784993?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Kiley Hamlin & Karen Wynn & Paul Bloom, 2007. "Social evaluation by preverbal infants," Nature, Nature, vol. 450(7169), pages 557-559, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Mitsuhiko Ishikawa & Yun-hee Park & Michiteru Kitazaki & Shoji Itakura, 2017. "Social information affects adults’ evaluation of fairness in distributions: An ERP approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(2), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Zhao, Liang, 2008. "Rethinking basically Economic Assumption on Individual Behavior from Empirical Viewpoints of Evolution and Behavior," MPRA Paper 11152, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Jessica Bregant & Alex Shaw & Katherine D. Kinzler, 2016. "Intuitive Jurisprudence: Early Reasoning About the Functions of Punishment," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 13(4), pages 693-717, December.
    4. Gabriele Chierchia & Fabio Tufano & Giorgio Coricelli, 2017. "Friends or Strangers? Strategic Uncertainty and Cooperation across Experimental Games of Strategic Complements and Substitutes," Discussion Papers 2017-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    5. Yasuhiro Kanakogi & Michiko Miyazaki & Hideyuki Takahashi & Hiroki Yamamoto & Tessei Kobayashi & Kazuo Hiraki, 2022. "Third-party punishment by preverbal infants," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 6(9), pages 1234-1242, September.
    6. Fazekas, Károly, 2016. "Tisztesség, empátia, közgazdaságtan [Honour, empathy and economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 1120-1141.
    7. Molnar-Szakacs, Istvan, 2011. "From actions to empathy and morality - A neural perspective," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 77(1), pages 76-85, January.
    8. Kyong-sun Jin & Fransisca Ting & Zijing He & Renée Baillargeon, 2024. "Infants expect some degree of positive and negative reciprocity between strangers," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    9. John Hartwick, 2010. "Encephalization and division of labor by early humans," Journal of Bioeconomics, Springer, vol. 12(2), pages 77-100, July.
    10. J Kiley Hamlin & Andrew S Baron, 2014. "Agency Attribution in Infancy: Evidence for a Negativity Bias," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-8, May.
    11. Fernando P Santos & Francisco C Santos & Jorge M Pacheco, 2016. "Social Norms of Cooperation in Small-Scale Societies," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-13, January.
    12. Marek Meristo & Luca Surian, 2014. "Infants Distinguish Antisocial Actions Directed towards Fair and Unfair Agents," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(10), pages 1-7, October.
    13. Elena Vaporova & Norbert Zmyj, 2020. "Social evaluation and imitation of prosocial and antisocial agents in infants, children, and adults," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-16, September.
    14. Manasi Malik & Leyla Isik, 2023. "Relational visual representations underlie human social interaction recognition," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-11, December.
    15. Arian Petoft & Mahmoud Abbasi, 2022. "Children’s Criminal Perception; Lessons from Neurolaw," Child Indicators Research, Springer;The International Society of Child Indicators (ISCI), vol. 15(5), pages 1905-1920, October.
    16. Pablo Medina & Eric Goles & Roberto Zarama & Sergio Rica, 2017. "Self-Organized Societies: On the Sakoda Model of Social Interactions," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2017, pages 1-16, January.
    17. Geoffrey Hodgson, 2014. "The evolution of morality and the end of economic man," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 83-106, January.
    18. Yin Wang & Antonia F de C Hamilton, 2013. "Understanding the Role of the ‘Self’ in the Social Priming of Mimicry," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(4), pages 1-11, April.
    19. Liang, Zhao, 2009. "Reexamination of Individual Knowledge and Common Behavior Rules: A Cross-disciplinary View Based on Empirical Evidences," MPRA Paper 20050, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Elena Nava & Emanuela Croci & Chiara Turati, 2019. "‘I see you sharing, thus I share with you’: indirect reciprocity in toddlers but not infants," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-9, December.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:8:y:2018:i:2:p:2158244018784993. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.