Peek‐a‐What? Infants’ Response to the Still‐Face Task After Normal and Interrupted Peek‐a‐Boo
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Infants’ sensitivity to the vitality or tension envelope within dyadic social exchanges was investigated by examining their responses following normal and interrupted games of peek‐a‐boo embedded in a Still‐Face Task. Infants 5–6 months old engaged in two modified Still‐Face Tasks with their mothers. In one task, the initial interaction ended with a sequence of normal peek‐a‐boos that included tension build‐up, peak, and release. In the other task, the initial interaction was followed by a sequence of peek‐a‐boos that ended with an interrupted peek‐a‐boo in which the build‐up was followed directly by the still face. Infants showed the still‐face effect with their attention and smiling when the still face followed the normal peek‐a‐boo sequence, but only with smiling when the still face followed the sequence with the interrupted peek‐a‐boo. Infants’ social bidding to their mothers in the still‐face phase was greater following the interrupted peek‐a‐boo sequence. When social exchanges are interrupted before the closure of the vitality envelope, infants respond with more attention vigilance and social bidding, demonstrating their awareness of the structure of social exchanges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it