Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.

Adults tend to attribute agency and intention to the causes of negative outcomes, even if those causes are obviously mechanical. Is this over-attribution of negative agency the result of years of practice with attributing agency to actual conspecifics, or is it a foundational aspect of our agency-de...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: J Kiley Hamlin, Andrew S Baron
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2014-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24801144/pdf/?tool=EBI
_version_ 1819100714077519872
author J Kiley Hamlin
Andrew S Baron
author_facet J Kiley Hamlin
Andrew S Baron
author_sort J Kiley Hamlin
collection DOAJ
description Adults tend to attribute agency and intention to the causes of negative outcomes, even if those causes are obviously mechanical. Is this over-attribution of negative agency the result of years of practice with attributing agency to actual conspecifics, or is it a foundational aspect of our agency-detection system, present in the first year of life? Here we present two experiments with 6-month-old infants, in which they attribute agency to a mechanical claw that causes a bad outcome, but not to a claw that causes a good outcome. Control experiments suggest that the attribution stems directly from the negativity of the outcome, rather than from physical cues present in the stimuli. Together, these results provide evidence for striking developmental continuity in the attribution of agency to the causes of negative outcomes.
first_indexed 2024-12-22T01:07:09Z
format Article
id doaj.art-04d49e2a71be4616acd428b899c23b10
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-22T01:07:09Z
publishDate 2014-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-04d49e2a71be4616acd428b899c23b102022-12-21T18:44:03ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032014-01-0195e9611210.1371/journal.pone.0096112Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.J Kiley HamlinAndrew S BaronAdults tend to attribute agency and intention to the causes of negative outcomes, even if those causes are obviously mechanical. Is this over-attribution of negative agency the result of years of practice with attributing agency to actual conspecifics, or is it a foundational aspect of our agency-detection system, present in the first year of life? Here we present two experiments with 6-month-old infants, in which they attribute agency to a mechanical claw that causes a bad outcome, but not to a claw that causes a good outcome. Control experiments suggest that the attribution stems directly from the negativity of the outcome, rather than from physical cues present in the stimuli. Together, these results provide evidence for striking developmental continuity in the attribution of agency to the causes of negative outcomes.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24801144/pdf/?tool=EBI
spellingShingle J Kiley Hamlin
Andrew S Baron
Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
PLoS ONE
title Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
title_full Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
title_fullStr Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
title_full_unstemmed Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
title_short Agency attribution in infancy: evidence for a negativity bias.
title_sort agency attribution in infancy evidence for a negativity bias
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmid/24801144/pdf/?tool=EBI
work_keys_str_mv AT jkileyhamlin agencyattributionininfancyevidenceforanegativitybias
AT andrewsbaron agencyattributionininfancyevidenceforanegativitybias