Pilot Study Investigating Infant Vagal Reactivity and Visual Behavior During Object Perception
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The authors examined whether changes in vagal tone were related to infant visual attention during auditory and visual events paired (synchronous) and not paired (asynchronous) in time. They predicted that infants would demonstrate greater visual attention to the synchronous slideshow and that vagal tone would decrease with visual attention. METHOD: Nineteen infants, 3.5 months old, watched computer-generated synchronous or asynchronous slideshows of auditory and visual stimuli. Visual behavior and vagal tone data were collected. Vagal tone reflects physiological responses during attention or exposure to mild stressors. Repeated-measures analysis of variance examined differences in vagal tone across conditions. RESULTS: Visual behavior did not differ between the synchronous and asynchronous slideshow conditions. Vagal tone was significantly lower during the asynchronous slideshow. CONCLUSION: Infants may discriminate synchronous from asynchronous stimuli without changing visual behavior. Implications related to play with toys or objects are discussed.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".