Early Attentional Capture of Animate Motion: 4-Year-Olds Show a Pop-Out Effect for Chasing Stimuli
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Preferential attention to animate motion develops early in life, and adults and infants are particularly attuned to chasing motion. Adults can detect chasing objects among up to 10 distractors and are better at detecting a chase among nonchasing distractors than a nonchase among chasing distractors. We tested whether an attentional preference for chasing has developed by the age of 4, and whether 4-year-olds can explicitly point out chasing objects. On a touch screen, participants were shown a chasing pair of circles among a varying number of distractors (2,4,6,8,10). Participants had to touch the chaser. Reaction time for adults or 4-year-olds was independent of distractor numbers, consistent with a pop-out effect for chasing stimuli. As early as 4 years of age, children show a pop-out effect for chasing objects and can identify them via touch.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".