1. What were the theoretical propositions of this experiment? In what aspect(s) of human behavior were they interested? What question(s) were they seeking to answer?
The researchers were interested in human’s visual ability and depth perception and those behaviors are innate or learned. Through this experiment, they were seeking to answer these questions: Are we born with or develop the skill to comprehend that some objects are more distant than others and interpret the world around us? When can a person or animal perceive the optical and tactical stimuli associated with depth and height? Do animals and animals learn depth perception at different times? In terms of theoretical propositions, Gibson and Walk presented a “nativist” position …show more content…
Except for nine infants who did not move from the centerboard, all 27 of them crawled across the glass when their mothers called them from the shallow side, and among them, only three did so with great hesitation. When their mothers called them from the deep side, many crawled away to the shallow side or cried in frustration because they could not get to their mothers without going across the deep side. The children patted the glass with their hands, making sure that a solid surface was ahead of them, but still refused to crawl across the deep …show more content…
Also, it was impossible to test infants who had not learned to crawl. Moreover, a later study went against Gibson and Walk’s conclusion. In this later experiment, the heart rate of babies between two and five months decreased, indicating that they were rather interested than scared and did not learn the fear of dropping off the cliff at this range of age yet. However, what was really important was that the visual cliff experiment was the first to try out the method using visual cliff device and test infants in a lab setting. Also, since the issue of whether depth perception is innate or developed is still controversial, other related research are using this visual cliff experiment and discovering interesting new
The researchers were interested in human’s visual ability and depth perception and those behaviors are innate or learned. Through this experiment, they were seeking to answer these questions: Are we born with or develop the skill to comprehend that some objects are more distant than others and interpret the world around us? When can a person or animal perceive the optical and tactical stimuli associated with depth and height? Do animals and animals learn depth perception at different times? In terms of theoretical propositions, Gibson and Walk presented a “nativist” position …show more content…
Except for nine infants who did not move from the centerboard, all 27 of them crawled across the glass when their mothers called them from the shallow side, and among them, only three did so with great hesitation. When their mothers called them from the deep side, many crawled away to the shallow side or cried in frustration because they could not get to their mothers without going across the deep side. The children patted the glass with their hands, making sure that a solid surface was ahead of them, but still refused to crawl across the deep …show more content…
Also, it was impossible to test infants who had not learned to crawl. Moreover, a later study went against Gibson and Walk’s conclusion. In this later experiment, the heart rate of babies between two and five months decreased, indicating that they were rather interested than scared and did not learn the fear of dropping off the cliff at this range of age yet. However, what was really important was that the visual cliff experiment was the first to try out the method using visual cliff device and test infants in a lab setting. Also, since the issue of whether depth perception is innate or developed is still controversial, other related research are using this visual cliff experiment and discovering interesting new