Do Preterm Infants Perceive Temporal Synchrony? An Analysis with the Eye-Tracking System

in Timing & Time Perception
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

The aim of this study was to investigate auditory–visual temporal asynchrony in preterm infants using a habituation procedure coupled with an eye-tracking system in order to examine visual behavior accurately and determine specific visual areas of interest. Sixteen term infants, twelve low-risk near-term (LBW) preterm infants and eight Very Low Birth Weight (VLBW) preterm infants were tested at four months post term. Infants were habituated with an auditory–visual synchronic situation: a visual ball bounced back in synchrony with an auditory sound. In the test phase, an asynchronized situation and a synchronized situation were presented alternately three times. The results showed that VLBW infants spent more time looking at the target before being habituated compared to LBW preterm infants and full-term infants.

Specific areas of interest showed that VLBW infants spent less time on the target than LBW and full-term infants and had a more heterogeneous visual exploration. Nevertheless, VLBW infants had the same novelty reaction as the other infant groups. Moreover, the study of areas of interest revealed that whatever the age group, infants looked more at the area where the sound was produced during the asynchronized trial. This result suggests that infants perceive asynchrony. We suggest that VLBW preterm infants show the same ability to habituate and novelty recovery through an early learning experience due to earlier additional extra-uterine exposure.

Sections

References

AllisonC. L., GabrielH., SchlangeD., & FredricksonS. (2007). An optometric approach to patients with sensory integration dysfunction. Optometry, 78, 644651.

AlsH., ButlerS., KostaS., & McAnultyG. (2005). The Assessment of Preterm Infants’ Behavior (APIB): Furthering the understanding and measurement of neurodevelopmental competence in preterm and full-term infants. Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev., 11, 94102.

Alvarez-GarciaA., Fornieles-DeuA., Costas-MoragasC., & Botet-MussonsF. (2015). Neurobehavioral conditions and effects of gender, weight and severity in preterm infants according to the Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. An. Psicol. , 31, 818824.

AncelP.-Y., & GoffinetF. (2014). EPIPAGE 2: A preterm birth cohort in France in 2011. BMC Pediatr., 14, 97.

AncelP.-Y., GoffinetF., KuhnP., LangerB., MatisJ., HernandorenaX., & KaminskiM. (2015). Survival and morbidity of preterm children born at 22 through 34 weeks’ gestation in France in 2011: Results of the EPIPAGE-2 cohort study. JAMA Pediatr., 169, 230238.

BahrickL. E., & LickliterR. (2004). Infants’ perception of rhythm and tempo in unimodal and multimodal stimulation: A developmental test of the intersensory redundancy hypothesis. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci., 4, 137147.

BahrickL. E., LickliterR., & FlomR. (2006). Up versus down: The role of intersensory redundancy in the development of infants’ sensitivity to the orientation of moving objects. Infancy, 9, 7396.

BahrickL. E., LickliterR., & FlomR. (2014). Intersensory redundancy guides the development of selective attention, perception, and cognition in infancy. Curr. Dire. Psychol. Sci., 13, 99102.

BeainoG., KhoshnoodB., KaminskiM., MarretS., PierratV., VieuxR., & AncelP. Y. (2011). Predictors of the risk of cognitive deficiency in very preterm infants: The EPIPAGE prospective cohort. Acta Paediatr. 100, 370378.

BlochH. (1983). La poursuite visuelle chez le nouveau-né à terme et chez le prématuré. Enfance, 1, 1929.

BlochH., LequienP., & ProvasiJ. (2003). L’enfant prématuré. Paris, France: Armand Colin.

BoninM., PomerleauA., & MalcuitG. (1998). A longitudinal study of visual attention and psychomotor development in preterm and full-term infants during the first six months of life. Infant Behav. Dev., 21, 103118.

BrazeltonT. B. (1978). Organization and stability of newborn behavior: A commentary on the Brazelton Neonatal Behavior Assessment Scale: Introduction. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev., 43, 113.

BullingerA., & GoubetN. (1999). Le bébé prématuré, acteur de son développement. Enfance, 52, 2732.

CohenL. B. (1972). Attention-getting and attention-holding processes of infant visual preferences. Child Dev., 43, 869879.

DixonN. F., & SpitzL. (1980). The detection of auditory visual desynchrony. Perception, 9, 719721.

GallayM., DurandK., BaudouinJ. Y., LemoineC., & LécuyerR. (2006). Qualitative differences in the exploration of upright and upside-down faces in four-month-old infants: An eye-movement study. Child Dev., 77, 984996.

GibsonJ. J. (1966). The senses considered as perceptual systems. Boston, MA, USA: Houghton Mifflin.

GogateL., MadhavilathaM., & PerenyiA. (2014). Preterm and term infants’ perception of temporally coordinated syllable-object pairings: Implications for lexical development. J. Speech Lang. Hear. Res., 57, 187199.

HorowitzF. D. (1974). Visual attention, auditory stimulation, and language discrimination in young infants. Monogr. Soc. Res. Child Dev., 39, 1140.

HunniusS., GeuzeR. H., ZweensM. J., & BosA. F. (2008). Effects of preterm experience on the developing visual system: A longitudinal study of shifts of attention and gaze in early infancy. Dev. Neuropsychol., 33, 521535.

KavšekM., & BornsteinM. H. (2010). Visual habituation and dishabituation in preterm infants: A review and meta-analysis. Res. Dev. Disabil., 31, 951975

KoppF. (2014). Audiovisual temporal fusion in 6-month-old infants. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci., 9, 5667.

KoppF., & DietrichC. (2013). Neural dynamics of audiovisual synchrony and asynchrony perception in 6-month-old infants. Front. Psychol., 4, 113. doi: .

LarroqueB., AncelP. Y., MarretS., MarchandL., AndréM., ArnaudC., & KaminskiM. (2008). Neurodevelopmental disabilities and special care of 5-year-old children born before 33 weeks of gestation (the EPIPAGE study): A longitudinal cohort study. Lancet, 371(9615), 813820.

LawsonK. R., & AlE. (1984). Auditory–visual responsiveness in full-term and preterm infants. Dev. Psychol., 20, 120127.

LejeuneF., MarcusL., Berne-AudeoudF., StreriA., DebillonT., & GentazE. (2012). Intermanual transfer of shapes in preterm human infants from 33 to 34 + 6 weeks postconceptional age. Child Dev ., 83), 794800.

LewkowiczD. J. (1992). Infants’ response to temporally based intersensory equivalence: The effect of synchronous sounds on visual preferences for moving stimuli. Infant Behav. Dev., 15, 297324.

LewkowiczD. J. (1996). Perception of auditory–visual temporal synchrony in human infants. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. , 22, 10941106.

LewkowiczD. J. (2010). Infant perception of audio–visual speech synchrony. Dev. Psychol., 46, 6677.

MarretS., Marchand-MartinL., PicaudJ. C., HascoëtJ. M., ArnaudC., RozéJ. C., & AncelP. Y. (2013). Brain injury in very preterm children and neurosensory and cognitive disabilities during childhood: the epipage cohort study. PLoS ONE, 8, 19. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0062683.

MellierD. (1999). La prématurité: l’Ouverture de problématiques nouvelles. Enfance, 52, 311.

MellierD. (2017). L’enfant prématuré : Développement et soins psychologiques. In MiljkovitchR., Morange-MajouxF., & SanderE. (Eds), Traité de psychologie du développement (pp. 136). Paris, France: Masson.

MolinaM., SannC., DavidM., TouréY., GuilloisB., & JouenF. (2015). Active touch in late-preterm and early-term neonates. Dev. Psychobiol., 57, 322335.

PickensJ., FieldT., NawrockiT., MartinezA., SoutulloD., & GonzalezJ. (1994). Full-term and preterm infants’ perception of face-voice synchrony. Infant Behav. Dev., 17, 447455.

PomerleauA., ChamberlandC., MalcuitG., & LabergeD. (1982). Effet des stimuli écologiques et des programmes de renforcement sur les comportements exploratoires et ludiques de l’enfant. [Effect of environmental stimuli and reinforcement schedules on the exploratory and play behavior in the child]. Can. J. Psychol., 36, 4256.

PonsF., & LewkowiczD. J. (2014). Infant perception of audio–visual speech synchrony in familiar and unfamiliar fluent speech. Acta Psychol., 149, 142147.

PosnerM. I., NissenM. J., & KleinR. M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance. Psychol. Rev, 83, 157171.

RoseS. A. (1983). Differential rates of visual information processing in full-term and preterm infants. Child Dev., 54, 11891198.

RoseS. A., FeldmanJ. F., & JankowskiJ. J. (2002). Processing speed in the 1st year of life: A longitudinal study of preterm and full-term infants. Dev. Psychol., 38, 895902.

ShumD., NeulingerK., O’CallaghanM., & MohayH. (2008). Attentional problems in children born very preterm or with extremely low birth weight at 7–9 years. Arch. Clin. Neuropsychol., 23, 103112.

Strand-BroddK., EwaldU., GrönqvistH., HolmströmG., StrömbergB., GrönqvistE., & RosanderK. (2011). Development of smooth pursuit eye movements in very prematurely born infants: 1. General aspects. Acta Paediatr., 100, 983991.

Van de Weijer-BergsmaE., WijnroksL., & JongmansM. J. (2008). Attention development in infants and preschool children born preterm: A review. Infant Behav. Dev., 31, 333351.

VatakisA., & SpenceC. (2006). Audiovisual synchrony perception for music, speech, and object actions. Brain Res., 1111, 134142.

Von HofstenC., & RosanderK. (1997). Development of smooth pursuit tracking in young infants. Vis. Res., 37, 17991810.

Figures

  • Experimental design: synchronized and asynchronized videos. In the synchronized video, the sound was associated with the bounce of the ball at the bottom of the screen; in the asynchronized video, the sound was delayed by 450 ms after the ball reached the bottom of the screen.

    View in gallery
  • Ball on the screen. The different areas of interest (AOIs) are displayed: (a) top; (b) middle top; (c) middle; (d) middle bottom; (e) bottom; (f) course of the ball; and (g) screen.

    View in gallery
  • Mean duration of looking during the first three trials of the habituation phase (a, b, c) and the last three trials of the habituation phase (x, y, z) as a function of infant group: Term, LBW (infants born between 34 and 36 GA) and VLBW (infants born between 31 and 33 GA).

    View in gallery
  • Mean looking time in seconds of Term, LBW and VLBW infants during the last habituation phase trial, the first test trial (temporal asynchrony) and the first familiar test trial. LBW = infants born between 34 and 36 GA weeks; VLBW = infants born between 31 and 33 GA weeks.

    View in gallery
  • Mean looking time (s) on the ball course of Term (FT), LBW and VLBW infants during test trials (synch = synchronized trial; asynch = asynchronized trial).

    View in gallery
  • Illustration of visual exploration of the screen during the test phase for full-term infants and VLBW preterm infants. The brighter the area, the more time the infants spent looking at it.

    View in gallery
  • Total looking time (s) of Term, LBW and VLBW preterm infants on the different AOIs (Areas of Interest): bottom, middle bottom, middle, middle top and top.

    View in gallery
  • Total looking time (s) of Term, LBW and VLBW preterm infants on the middle bottom area of the screen during the last habituation phase trial (last habituation), the first asynchronized test trial (asynchro), and the first familiar test trial (synchro).

    View in gallery

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 14 14 14
Full Text Views 6 6 6
PDF Downloads 2 2 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0