prominence of infants' looking behaviors

As developmental cognitive neuroscience advances, it is likely that new measurement techniques which would leave less space for rich interpretation will be invented. For instance, perhaps, it will become possible to see whether an infant’s brain processes an impossible event, such as a magical disappearance, following the same pathways or firing the same regions as in an adult’s brain. Probably, it will become easier to determine how much information infants are capable of processing and the mechanisms that enable them to process any information of concern. Current theories of cognitive development will be tested with these new methods and maybe unexpected conclusions will be drawn.

Today, even though it is becoming more and more common to use methods such as EEG in developmental studies, observing infant’s behavior, such as familiarization or habituation tendencies, is still playing an important role in research on cognitive development. These studies are being tested majorly against two developmental theories: Piaget’s constructivist theory and core knowledge theory. According to Piaget’s constructivist theory, children actively construct knowledge for themselves in response to their experiences. This theory emphasizes the role of learning mechanisms, such as assimilation and accommodation, in cognitive development. It asserts that infants are born with general learning abilities and active construction is needed to increase knowledge. Core knowledge theory does not ignore the importance of learning; however, contrary to Piagetian perspective, it asserts that infants are born with not only general learning mechanisms, but also with some knowledge of fundamental concepts. Since many studies leave room for rich interpretation, findings of current research can be used to support either. For instance, findings of Baillergeon’s study on expectancies of very young infants related to containment, occlusion, and covering events can be used as evidence that supports infants possess some innate knowledge about these concepts. However, the same research may also suggest that infants are born with general learning abilities that enable them to learn about these concepts as early as a few months old, by actively observing their surroundings.

Whether it is used to support the constructivist theory or the core knowledge theory, recent research contributes to an important finding: infants are more competent than they were thought to be. Even though it is plausible to think that instead of physical laws, “what” infants detect in studies such as Wynn’s magical disappearance study, or Spelke’s object unity or continuity studies, may be some novelty that adults eyes fail to detect, the consistency in looking trends suggest that infants detect “something.” Probably the most important aspect of these findings is how predictive they may be in terms of cognitive development of a child. For instance, as quoted in Siegler, 7-month-olds who habituate slower have higher rates of learning disabilities when they are 6 years old. As demonstrated by this finding, regardless of which theory they are used to support, recent research in infants’ capabilities, combined with studies on neuroplasticity, may be used to detect developmental delays and make more efficient early intervention possible.