Innate sensitivity for self-propelled causal agency in newly hatched chicks

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America

Volumn 107, Issue 9, 2010, Pages 4483-4485

  Mascalzonia, Elena ^a   Regolina, Lucia ^a   Vallortigarab, Giorgio ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TRENTO   (Italy)

Author keywords

Animated object; Filial imprinting; Predisposition; Self propelled motion

Indexed keywords

ANIMAL EXPERIMENT; ARTICLE; CAUSAL MODELING; CHICK; COLOR; EVOLUTION; FILIAL IMPRINTING; HATCHING; LEARNING; MOTION; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); NONHUMAN; PHYSICAL CAPACITY; PHYSICAL SENSITIVITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECEPTIVE FIELD; SENSORY NERVE;

ANIMALS; ANIMALS, NEWBORN; BEHAVIOR, ANIMAL; CHICKENS; LOCOMOTION;

VERTEBRATA;

EID: 77749264605     PISSN: 00278424     EISSN: 10916490     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0908792107     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Caramazza A, Shelton J-R (1998) Domain-specific knowledge systems in the brain: the animate-inanimate distinction. J Cogn Neurosci 10:1-34.
2. New J, Cosmides L, Tooby J (2007) Category-specific attention for animals reflects ancestral priorities, not expertise. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:16598-6603.
3. Woodward A-L, Phillips A, Spelke E-S (1993) Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ), pp 1087-1091.
4. Ellsworth C-P, Muir D-W, Hains S-M (1993) Social competence and person-object differentiation: an analysis of the still-face effect. Dev Psychol 29:63-73.
5. Mandler J-M (2000) Perceptual and conceptual processes in infancy. J Cogn Dev 1:3-36.
6. Molina M, Van de Walle G-A, Condry K, Spelke E-S (2004) The animate-inanimate distinction in infancy: developing sensitivity to constraints on human actions. J Cogn Dev 5:399-426.
7. Aristotle (1980) The Physics (Harvard Univ Press, Cambridge, MA).
8. Premack D (1990) The infant's theory of self-propelled objects. Cognition 36:1-16.
9. Leslie A-M (1994) Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, eds Hirschfeld L, Gelman S (Cambridge Univ Press, New York), pp 119-148.
10. Luo Y, Baillargeon R (2005) Can a self-propelled box have a goal? Psychological reasoning in 5-month-old infants. Psychol Sci 16:601-608.
11. Csibra G (2008) Goal attribution to inanimate agents by 6.5-month-old infants. Cognition 107:705-717.
12. Johnson S-C, Shimizu Y-A, Ok S-J (2007) Actors and actions: the role of agent behavior in infants' attribution of goals. Cogn Dev 22:310-322.
13. Shimizu Y-A, Johnson S-C (2004) Infants' attribution of a goal to a morphologically novel agent. Dev Sci 7:425-430.
14. Leslie A-M, Keeble S (1987) Do six-month-old infants perceive causality? Cognition 25:265-288.
15. Hauser M-D (1998) A nonhuman primate's expectations about object motion and destination: the importance of self-propelled movement and animacy. Dev Sci 1:31-7.
16. Bateson PPG (2000) The Evolution Of Cognition, eds Heyes C, Huber L (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp 85-102.
17. Horn G (2004) Pathways of the past: the imprint of memory. Nat Rev Neurosci 5: 108-120.
18. Suge R, McCabe B-J (2004) Early stages of memory formation in filial imprinting: Foslike immunoreactivity and behavior in the domestic chick. Neuroscience 123:847-856.
19. Andrew R-J (1991) Neural and Behavioural Plasticity. The Use of the Chick as a Model (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford).
20. Rogers L-J (1993) The molecular neurobiology of early learning, development and sensitive periods, with emphasis on the avian brain. Mol Neurobiol 7:161-187.
21. Vallortigara G (2006) Comparative Cognition: Experimental Explorations of Animal Intelligence, eds Wasserman E-A, Zentall T-R (Oxford Univ Press, Oxford), pp 41-58.
22. Michotte A (1963) The Perception of Causality (Basic Books, New York).
23. O'Connell S, Dunbar R-I-M (2005) The perception of causality in chimpanzees (Pan spp.). Anim Cogn 8:60-66.
24. Luo Y, Kaufman L, Baillargeon R (2009) Young infants' reasoning about physical events involving inert and self-propelled objects. Cognit Psychol 58:441-486.
25. Rochat M-J, Serra E, Fadiga L, Gallese V (2008) The evolution of social cognition: goal familiarity shapes monkeys' action understanding. Curr Biol 18:227-232.
26. Rosa Salva O, Regolin L, Vallortigara G (2009) Faces are special for chicks: evidence for inborn domain-specific mechanisms underlying spontaneous preferences for face-like stimuli. Dev Sci, in press.
27. Vallortigara G, Regolin L, Marconato F (2005) Visually inexperienced chicks exhibit a spontaneous preference for biological motion patterns. PLoS Biol 3: 1312-1316.
28. Johnson M-H, Morton J (1991) Biology and Cognitive Development: The Case of Face Recognition (Blackwell, Oxford).
29. Simion F, Regolin L, Bulf H (2008) A. predisposition for biological motion in the newborn baby. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105:809-813.
30. Vallortigara G, Sovrano V-A, Chiandetti C (2009) Doing Socrates experiment right: controlled-rearing studies of geometrical knowledge in animals. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:20-26.
31. Landau B, Lakusta L (2009) Spatial representation across species: Geometry, language, and maps. Curr Opin Neurobiol 19:1-8.
32. Carey S (2009) The Origin of Concepts (Oxford Univ Press, New York).
33. Spelke E-S (2003) Language in Mind: Advances in the Investigation of Language and Thought, eds Gentner D, Goldin-Meadow S (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp 277-311.