Evaluating the Nature of the Still‐Face Effect in the Double Face‐to‐Face Still‐Face Paradigm Using Different Comparison Groups

Abstract

The current study explored two possible comparison groups for the double Face‐to‐Face Still‐Face (FFSF) paradigm to evaluate their effects on infant behavior and different hypotheses about the nature of the Still‐Face (SF) effect, an effect not fully understood. Mothers and their 4‐month‐old infants were randomly assigned to one of three groups, a double FFSF group (GroupFFSF, n = 44), a control, semi‐structured play group (GroupStory, n = 46), or a control, unstructured play group (GroupPlay, n = 28). As hypothesized, GroupFFSF infants exhibited the classic SF response (decreased positive affect and gaze to mother; increased negative affect) and GroupPlay infants showed an increase in negative affect over episodes. Contrary to expectations, GroupStory infants displayed a similar, but less intense, pattern of behavior as GroupFFSF. Taken together, the findings indicate that multiple episodes of face‐to‐face play exceeded 4‐month‐olds' regulatory capacities and that infants are sensitive to shared communicative intentions and violations of social expectations, whether these violations are negative or positive in nature.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 32 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.