[from Tracy B. Harms (2009-08-16 13:35 Pacific)]
Alison Gopnik on the intelligence of babies:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/opinion/16gopnik.html?_r=1&em
[From Bill Powers (2009.08.16.1841 MDT)]--
Tracy B. Harms (2009-08-16 13:35 Pacific) --
Interesting observations, but I wish that just once people studying what babies and see and know would say (in this case) "These babies appeared to be perceiving what an adult would call 'probability'." The idea seems to be that the probability is just there in the external world, and babies who show a discontinuity in their behavior must have perceived it and reacted to it.
All studies of babies would benefit from some kind of test for the controlled variable. I don't think Alison Gopnik has the slighest idea of what it was that caught the babies' attention. All she knew was how it looked to her.
It would be very useful to know exactly what it was about the situation that the babies were controlling for. That might tell us something about how adult concepts like probability are built up from lower-level perceptions.
Best,
Bill
ยทยทยท
Alison Gopnik on the intelligence of babies:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/16/opinion/16gopnik.html?_r=1&em