title: Preserved visual representations despite change blindness in infants.
abstract: Combining theoretical hypotheses of infant cognition and adult perception, we present evidence that infants can maintain visual representations despite their failure to detect a change. Infants under 12 months typically fail to notice a change to an object's height in a covering event. The present experiments demonstrated that 11-month-old infants can nevertheless maintain a viable representation of both the pre- and post-change heights despite their 'change blindness'. These results suggest that infants, like adults, can simultaneously maintain multiple representations, even if they do not optimally use them.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of California, Santa Cruz, California 95064, USA. suhua@ucsc.edu
authors.forename: Su-hua
authors.initials: SH
authors.lastname: Wang
authors.forename: Stephen R
authors.initials: SR
authors.lastname: Mitroff
mesh_terms: D001288:Attention / Q000502:physiology*; D001766:Blindness / Q000503:physiopathology; D005133:Eye Movements / Q000502:physiology; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007223:Infant; D008297:Male; D010775:Photic Stimulation / Q000379:methods; D013997:Time Factors; D014796:Visual Perception / Q000502:physiology*
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2007 Nov;43(6):1513-22
references.pmid: 18020828
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2003 Apr;65(3):458-68
references.pmid: 12785074
references.citation: Perspect Psychol Sci. 2008 Jan;3(1):2-13
references.pmid: 22623946
references.citation: Child Dev. 1988 Oct;59(5):1198-210
references.pmid: 3168636
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 1988 Oct;44(4):369-78
references.pmid: 3226885
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2008 May;11(3):427-32
references.pmid: 18466376
references.citation: Cognition. 2002 Aug;85(1):B1-10
references.pmid: 12086715
references.citation: Cognition. 2005 Sep;97(2):153-77
references.pmid: 16226561
references.citation: Cognition. 2001 Jun;80(1-2):179-213
references.pmid: 11245844
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2008 Jan;12(1):17-23
references.pmid: 18078778
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2004 Jun;15(6):420-5
references.pmid: 15147497
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2001 Mar;12(2):141-7
references.pmid: 11340923
references.citation: Cognition. 2001 Jun;80(1-2):127-58
references.pmid: 11245842
references.citation: Child Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;76(1):279-90
references.pmid: 15693772
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2006 Sep;9(5):F50-8
references.pmid: 16911437
references.citation: Percept Psychophys. 2004 Nov;66(8):1268-81
references.pmid: 15813193
references.citation: Cognition. 2005 Mar;95(2):129-73
references.pmid: 15694644
references.citation: Child Dev. 1991 Dec;62(6):1227-46
references.pmid: 1786712
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 1997 Jan;33(1):22-31
references.pmid: 9050387
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 1998 Jan 1;2(1):10-8
references.pmid: 21244957
references.citation: Cognition. 2005 Apr;95(3):297-328
references.pmid: 15788161
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2002 Mar;13(2):150-6
references.pmid: 11933999
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1996 Apr;30(2):111-53
references.pmid: 8635312
references.citation: J Exp Child Psychol. 2001 Jan;78(1):3-22
references.pmid: 11161419
references.citation: Trends Cogn Sci. 2005 Jan;9(1):16-20
references.pmid: 15639436
references.citation: Cognition. 1994 Apr-Jun;50(1-3):431-45
references.pmid: 8039373
references.citation: Cognition. 1999 Sep 30;72(2):125-66
references.pmid: 10553669
references.citation: Behav Brain Sci. 2001 Oct;24(5):939-73; discussion 973-1031
references.pmid: 12239892
references.citation: Dev Sci. 2006 Mar;9(2):173-81
references.pmid: 16472318
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 2003 Apr;29(2):388-403
references.pmid: 12760623
references.citation: Cognition. 2006 Mar;99(2):B31-41
references.pmid: 15939414