The Aesthetic Preferences of Infants: Pictures of Faces That Captivate Their Interest

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood
Volume 11 Number 4 2010

www.wwwords.co.uk/CIEC
The Aesthetic Preferences of Infants:

pictures of faces that captivate their interest
KATHERINA DANKO-McGHEE
Department of Art, University of Toledo, USA
ABSTRACT This research focused on the observation of infants between the ages of 2 and 18 months
with regard to their aesthetic preferences for a variety of visual stimuli. These stimuli included: a blackand-white schematic drawing of a baby, a popular cartoon image, a colorful abstract painting of a baby,
and a photographic image of a babys face. Prior research with this age group has determined that faces
are of most interest to them. However, young children are now bombarded by the visual media (i.e.
television and DVDs, picture books, etc.), and this preference may have changed. Determining the
aesthetic preferences of babies will help parents, childcare providers, and picture book
authors/illustrators to provide visual imagery that is aesthetically appealing to them. Providing visually
stimulating imagery can help babies to develop their visual discrimination and tracking skills. Research
confirms that birth to five years is the most important period for children with respect to brain
development. Therefore, more research is needed that will provide us with clues about what forms of
visual stimulation are appropriate in order to better facilitate this developmental process.
Introduction
Seeing the world with fresh eyes is exactly what happens to newborns as they become acclimated
to their new surroundings upon arrival. It does not take long for them to experience delight in
looking at a variety of visual stimuli. While infants are watching the new world around them,
adults, in turn, are charmed by their responses. Babies have captivated the interest of researchers
for a long time. And these research findings have provided us with a small window of opportunity
to enter into the world of infants, which has helped to facilitate our understanding of their visual
responses. The research presented in this article is yet another opportunity that provides insight
into the aesthetic delight of infants, aged 2 to 18 months. When infants are presented with a variety
of visual images, which ones elicit an aesthetic response from them?
Stores that sell items for babies have an abundance of colorful toys, bedding, books, videos,
and musical recordings to choose from. Linn (2008) notes that the media and marketing industries
train infants to rely on items that are sold for their comfort and amusement. Adults also decorate
infants rooms with popular characters from the media and offer them opportunities to watch these
characters on television. Typically, items are purchased for babies because of their aesthetic appeal
to well-meaning adults. Providing babies with aesthetically pleasing environments (which includes
visuals) is important for their overall development (Honig, 2003). Today, infants spend numerous
hours each week in day-care centers where they absorb a variety of visual stimuli, which can
impact the childs behavior. Designing environments for young children is an area for further study
because most centers and infant nurseries are designed according to adult aesthetic standards, not
those of the child (Read & Upington, 2009). How do adults know what babies aesthetically prefer?
Let us first take a look at the definition of aesthetics.
365
http://dx.doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2010.11.4.365
Katherina Danko-McGhee
Theoretical Foundations
Aesthetics and Visual Culture
Oftentimes, we use the word aesthetic when referring to a work of art, but today, our world
contains a plethora of visual images. We need not go to an art museum to see art. It is all around
us: on billboards, MTV, packaged products in a grocery store, picture books, toys the list goes on.
These visual images can be powerful because of their aesthetic allure. They can charm us into
buying things that we do not really need and they can keep us fixated on the television screen for
endless hours. For the adults in our society, this is the world that we have seen slowly manifest
itself over decades. For many youth, it might be the only world that they have come to know.
These popular images are often referred to as visual culture, which has been defined in many
different ways (Mirzoeff, 1999; Hooper-Greenhill, 2000; Sturken & Cartwright, 2001; Freedman,
2003; Tavin, 2003, 2005; Wilson, 2003; Duncum, 2004; Garoian & Gaudelius, 2004). However,
Sturken & Cartwrights (2001) definition appears to summarize the views of most theorists that
visual culture includes all forms of visual images, from television to fine art paintings. Freedman
adds that:
Contemporary experience with the sophisticated visual culture we see every day, and the
knowledge we construct through our many overlapping and associative visual experiences, tells
us that the aesthetics exists in many forms and is as interesting as it is sublime. (Freedman, 2003,
p. 32)
With a world saturated with what seems to be an infinite amount of visual images, having an
aesthetic experience is within reach of everyone, including infants.
Aesthetic Responses and Young Children
An aesthetic response for an adult is quite different than for a young child. While we know that an
infant brain is not yet fully developed cognitively, it is primed for learning at birth. Early sensory
experiences are necessary to wire the neural circuits in the brain for learning to occur (Brotherson,
2005). What this means with regard to aesthetic preferences is that adults are capable of processing
visual information on a reflective level when viewing an art-work, while the infant is not yet
capable of doing this. An adult can verbalize why they find something aesthetically appealing. For
an infant, we have to rely on body language, such as a visual fixation, a smile, a giggle, or reaching
for the image or object of desire.
While the visual cortex is one of the first to mature in the post-natal period (Bergen & Coscia,
2001), it is the limbic system that plays an important role here with regard to aesthetic response
because it is the seat of emotions (Cold et al, 1998). The amygdala, part of the limbic system, is
formed at birth and therefore emotions can be expressed by infants at an early age (Eliot, 1999).
Bergen & Coscia (2001, p. 28) note that: The limbic cortex, where emotions are recognized or felt,
matures during the 6 to 18 month-old period. The limbic system plays an important part in the
development of aesthetic preferences and makes us able to attach ourselves emotionally to objects
and people (Tinmannsvik & Bjelland, 2009, p. 378). Heifetz (1966) refers to the limbic system as
the visceral brain. Bearing this in mind, when one is captivated by an aesthetically pleasing image
or object, one way to respond is at the visceral level, where the brain perceives and analyzes and
the body reacts (Tinmannsvik & Bjelland, 2009, p. 378). When infants respond aesthetically to an
image/object, it is at this visceral level a pure sensory response. Of course, adults can respond in
this way as well.
In keeping with this line of thinking, according to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, aesthetic is
defined as responsive to or appreciative of what is pleasurable to the senses.[1] Preference is
defined as a special liking for one thing over another.[2] While these two terms are defined
differently, they actually are related. If a person sees something that they like (this is a preference)
and if it gives them pleasure via the senses i.e. taste, touch, smell, sight then this is more of an
aesthetic response. What this means for infants is that when they see something that they like (a
preference), and they respond to it through the senses by wanting to touch the viewed object or
image, fixate upon it, smile at it, or use any other body language to convey that they like it, then
366
Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

this is an aesthetic response. Therefore, the definition of aesthetic preference for this article is
defined as a sensory response to something that is liked. An aesthetic response is a sense of pleasure
that is triggered by viewing a pleasing image or object. According to the marketing research of
Tinmannsvik & Bjelland (2009, p. 376): For the child to take aesthetic interest in an object ... it is
important that it offers some kind of appealing sensory stimuli.
This is demonstrated in the recent research of Piscitelli & Smith (2009), who indicate that
there is a strong affiliation between children and art, and that they are indeed aesthetic beings
(p. 6). In their research with infants and toddlers in a museum setting, Piscitelli & Smith found that
infants, when finding an art-work aesthetically appealing to them, would keep their eyes focused
on the work while crawling toward it. Other infants, still in their mothers arms, would reach out
to touch the art-work or even try to lick it, for that multisensory experience. It was clear in this
research that children preferred three-dimensional work over two-dimensional pieces. This project
paves the way for our understanding of aesthetic preferences of infants and toddlers. Piscitelli &
Smith note: The data suggest that very young children can and do appreciate art and have
aesthetic experiences in museum settings (Piscitelli & Smith, 2009, p. 14).
There is other research as well that can attest that young children are capable of having an
aesthetic response. According to Dissanyake (2001, p. 336): In the first months of life, babies are
born with natural predispositions for aesthetic engagement. The pioneering work of
developmental psychiatrists LeCanuet et al (1995) and Trevarthen (1997) supports the claim that
infants come into this world with decided preferences. For example, the research of Slater et al
(1998) found that when shown attractive faces versus unattractive faces (as judged by adults),
newborns looked longer at the attractive faces. Research by Bornstein et al (1981) suggests that 12month-old infants prefer vertical symmetry versus horizontal or asymmetry. And, referring back to
the work of Piscitelli & Smith (2009) in a museum setting, there was an indication that infants
preferred shiny metallic surfaces and also art-works that had large color expanses.
Lim (2004) considers these early years to be the richest time for aesthetic development.
Ninety five percent of the information children receive comes to them through seeing, touching,
and hearing. Their sensory channels are their primary source of learning (Schiller, 1998, p. 52).
Childrens perception through the senses is much more intense than that of an adult (Keel, 1972).
And, as noted earlier, these sensory experiences play a role in aesthetic responses.
Most research with children conducted over the last century has not sought to understand
childrens aesthetic experience (Hogan, 1998). But more recently, education theorists and
practitioners have recognized the importance of aesthetic experiences for development and
learning (Epstein & Trimis, 2002; Johnson, 2007). Susan Wright (2003, p. 144) notes that when one
is captivated by an art form, the wow factor or a magic moment is a response that is central to
all modes of learning. Similarly, Helen Johnson (2007, p. 312) speaks about the wide awakedness that is critical in the development of the self-motivated and engaged learning.
According to Bourdieu (1984), aesthetic responses can be nurtured in various environments,
such as the home or the classroom. Here, children have opportunities to engage in dialogue about
their aesthetic responses to works of art or visual images. Adults play a vital role in this process
because they can facilitate this dialogue (Abbs, 1987; Wright, 2003). While infants can have
aesthetic responses, they may not yet be able to voice their opinion about an image or object.
However, their body language can demonstrate to an adult observer that they find an image or
object intriguing. It is important that the adult validate this response by being supportive and
interacting with the child during these times.
Dissanyake (2001) concurs that these early interactions are critical to the emotional, cognitive
and psychosocial functions in the future. As already indicated, adult interaction with young
children is a vital part of their aesthetic growth process. It is important for the adult to explore
along with the child and to point out visual characteristics while using descriptive language to
better support the learning process.
Important to this discussion is that aesthetic responses are socially constructed (Anderson,
2004). While infants have aesthetic preferences, it is likely that these preferences will differ for
infants in countries around the world. This is due to the variety of visual stimuli that are a part of
each indigenous cultural milieu (Anderson, 2004).
367
Past Research on the Aesthetic Preferences of Infants
There is a dearth of research that has been carried out in the art education arena with regard to the
aesthetic responses of infants. However, the fields of psychology and child development have long
been observing infants visual responses to various stimuli. This section is a review of that research.
While many of these researchers do not refer to these responses of infants as aesthetic, if we
bear in mind the definition of aesthetic preference for this article, infants have exhibited
characteristics of aesthetic preference in these studies. During the first year, infants grow physically,
cognitively, socially, emotionally and linguistically at rapid speeds, more than at any other time in
life (Berk, 2005). When babies are given the opportunities to demonstrate their capabilities, the
notion of the babies as an empty vessel becomes a myth (Kovach & Da Ros-Voseles, 2008, p. 21).
Babies learn through their sense of touch, taste, sound and smell. Observant adults will find that
babies are marvelous creatures, especially with regard to their aesthetic responses.
Aslin (1982) notes that even newborns have a visual processing system. A study by Adams &
Courage (1995) suggests that newborns can see color, although poorly, and a one-month-old child
can discriminate red from green and that other color discrimination develops slowly during the first
three months. More current research has suggested that 12-week-old infants have been found to
demonstrate preferences for colored visual stimuli as opposed to stimuli that are white (Zemach &
Teller, 2007). Around two months of age, there are changes in perceptual behavior (Haith, 1978).
Infants are now able to visually track an object, show a preference for a family member, gaze at an
object, and demonstrate interest in the environment (Kovach & Da Ros-Voseles, 2008). During this
growth process, [p]eople play a very special role in the world of infants (McKenzie & Day, 1987,
p. 12). It is important for adults to engage the child in sensory stimulation in order to facilitate
visual development that fosters growth.
Because infants perceptual behavior grows at rapid speeds, many visual stimulation research
studies have been done with this age group. Research by Fantz (1963) and DeCasper & Fifer (1980)
has indicated that the human face is more interesting to infants than geometric patterns. The work
of Duuren et al (2009) has found photographs of faces to be attractive to infants as well. Numerous
studies have shown that as soon as nine minutes after birth, babies prefer to look at pictures that
most resemble human faces (Goren et al, 1975; Johnson et al, 1991; Johnson & Morton, 1991;
Valenza et al, 1996; Simion et al, 1998; Mondloch et al, 1999). This suggests that these preferences
develop prenatally. In fact, Bednar & Miikkulainen (2003, p. 1525) note that: prenatal learning can
account for the newborn preferences for schematic and photographic images of faces, providing a
computational explanation for how genetic influences interact with experience to construct a
complex adaptive system.
The research by Fantz (1963) also indicates that while babies looked the longest at faces, they
were particularly interested in high-contrast black-and-white schematic drawings of faces. Despite
the fact that these findings are nearly 50 years old, his research still has an impact upon picture
books and mobiles that are produced for babies in the market today. Prior to two months, the
infant is unable to respond to the inner features of a face, focusing more on the outline of the face.
Very young infants (under two months) execute most of their scans to the regions of the hairline
and chin (Dodwell et al, 1987, p. 54). After two months, infants begin to pay more attention to the
internal elements of a face, i.e. eyes, nose, etc. They tend to concentrate heavily upon the eyes at
this time (Dodwell et al, 1987; Geldart et al, 1999).
Research by Maurer & Barrera (1981) demonstrated that two-month-old infants could
differentiate among a variety of drawings of the human face that included a naturally rendered face,
a symmetrical but scrambled face, and an asymmetrical face. The preference of two-month-old
infants in this study was for the natural arrangement of the face.
By three months of age, infants have built up prototypes of faces. This does not occur earlier
than three months (De Haan, 2001). By the time the infant reaches three to five months, they are
able to scan the components of a stimulus, such as a face, and look for more details (Aslin, 1982).
Infants can respond to all of the elements that comprise a face by four months (Salapatek & Cohen,
1987). Research has also suggested that a real face, as opposed to a picture of a face, yields the same
response (Yonas & Owsley, 1987). When presented with a picture of a face, four-month-old infants
respond with a smile (Kagan et al, 1966). Additional investigations indicate that four-month-old
infants will fixate longer on a pictured smiling face as opposed to one that is not smiling (Le
368

Barbera et al, 1976). By this time (four months), infants have developed visual inspection strategies
much like adults use, where the eyes on a face receive most of the attention (Zusne, 1970).
The research of Lewis et al (1966) found that six-month-old babies fixated longer on a
photograph of a face as opposed to a linear drawing of a face. Similar results were found by Geldart
et al (1999), who worked with five-month-old infants. The research of Slater et al (1998) indicated
that infants preferred attractive versus unattractive faces.
Many of the aforementioned studies used preferential looking, dwell time and reaching to
determine the childs preference for a visual stimulus. While there is a plethora of research that
focuses on these attention mechanisms, only the research that is germane to the present
investigation will be discussed here.
Methods of Discerning Aesthetic Preferences in Infants
Preferential looking. When studying the visual preferences of infants, preferential looking is the
method that is most widely used (Atkinson, 2000). While Fantz et al (1962) were the pioneers of
this method, Teller (1979) made improvements upon the procedure, which she refers to as forcedchoice preferential looking. This method has the infant sit in front of a screen that contains two visual
stimuli. The researcher sits behind the screen and observes the viewing behavior of the child.
Another researcher, on the same side as the child, controls the placement of the visual stimuli so
that the researcher behind the screen does not know which side each of the stimuli is located.
When the researcher behind the screen observes the child (via a peephole) to fixate upon a
preferred stimulus, a blind decision or forced choice is made. The observer may read body
language, eye movements and head movements as indicators from the child that a particular
stimulus is preferred. The entire process typically does not exceed 10 seconds.
Dwell time and reaching. Because the newborn has control over head and eye movements, fixation
or dwell time can be used as an indicator for a visual preference for a stimulus (Atkinson, 2000).
Bronson (1990) suggests that during the infants first six weeks, scanning behaviors develop and the
child is capable of fixating or dwelling on a single target. As babies develop between birth and six
months, they are able to change their fixation between target stimuli. The research by Bornstein et
al (1988) and Slater et al (1998), mentioned earlier in this article, also utilized observation and
fixation behaviors of infants to collect their data. According to Atkinson (2000, p. 8): Many
successful behavioral studies of infant vision, throughout the first year of life, have depended upon
fixation behavior. In addition to fixation, infants often reach for the viewed target of choice. This
typically happens around four months of age (Atkinson, 2000). Claus von Hofsten (1982) and King
et al (1996) confirm this and found in their investigations that infants reach for the object that they
are fixated upon. By four months of age, infants reaches are visually guided (McDonnell, 1975;
Bower, 1976; King et al, 1996), meaning that their hand follows their eye movement as they fixate
on a stimulus. Direct observations of infants and their fixation behaviors have been found to be a
quite adequate method when studying aesthetic preferences for visual stimuli (Atkinson, 2000).
Linking Previous Infant Research with the Present Research Investigation
While psychologists and child development theorists have conducted most of the research on
visual preferences of infants, art and early childhood educators can use this important information
to help guide further research with this young age group. As already noted, work with infants in
the early childhood art education research arena is almost non-existent. Therefore, the present
investigation can serve as a starting point to further explore this area.
As indicated earlier, because the perceptual abilities of the infant undergo a considerable
amount of change around the second month of life and they are able to fixate on a target (Amigo,
1972; Bronson, 1974; Pamelee & Sigman, 1976), the present research investigation began with twomonth-old infants and included children up to 18 months of age. Taking into account that faces are
preferred over other stimuli (as indicated from the previously discussed research i.e. Fantz [1963]
and DeCasper & Fifer [1980]), this research study endeavored to determine what, when given a
variety of choices (which was not always the case in earlier research), kind of face (i.e. a photograph
369
of a babys face, a colorful abstract painting of a babys face, a black-and-white schematic drawing
of a babys face, or a colorful picture of Dora the Explorer) would be most intriguing for infants
aged 2 to 18 months. Presently, due to the increased exposure to television and the popular media,
babies aesthetic preferences may have changed from what previous research has already indicated
that they prefer photographs of faces as well as black-and-white schematic drawings of faces.
Although the research by Slater et al (1998) indicated that infants preferred attractive versus
unattractive faces, visual culture has changed significantly since this research was done over 10
years ago. With the plethora of images available today, including a variety of images of faces, what
kind do infants now prefer?
In recent years, we have seen the influx of cartoon images and baby videos (most notably the
Baby Einstein series) that have vivid colors and movement. Perhaps such experiences wire the
brain in a way that refocuses the childs preference for other types of images, such as abstracted
and/or cartoon-like images. One of the extraneous variables considered in this study is early
television watching (as a major portal that transmits visual culture) and the impact on aesthetic
preference for various visual stimuli.
Popular culture and the mass media are far-reaching around the world. According to Sinclair
et al:
The media imperialism perspective more particularly sees that the major world sources for
programme exports are located in the USA and secondarily in Europe, mainly in the UK [United
Kingdom], and that these centers act as nodes through which all flows of cultural products must
pass, including those from one peripheral part of the world to another ... the image flow is
heavier than ever. (Sinclair et al, 2004, p. 297)
Sklair (2004, p. 75) further notes that: mass media begins to inculcate the dominant ideology into
the minds of viewers, listeners and readers from an early age.
The statistics of such a young age group with regard to mass media influences are as follows:
The television is on at least half of the time for two-thirds of zero- to six-year-olds (Healy, 2004).
Forty percent of three-month-old infants are watching screen media regularly. The number
increases to 90% by the time they are two (Zimmerman et al, 2007).
Babies are forming mental images of corporate logos and mascots by six months of age (Hood,
2000).
There is a television in the bedroom of 19% of babies one year and younger (Rideout & Hamel,
2006).
More than two hours a day are spent with screen media by 14% of children who are under two
years of age (Rideout & Hamel, 2006).
With such statistics, mass media may have an impact upon the aesthetic preferences of young
children.
Keeping in mind the previous discussion, the three research questions that guided the present
research investigation are as follows:
1. When given a choice of four faces as the visual stimuli, will more than 50% of infants prefer a
particular image in each picture pair? For example, will more infants fixate upon a black-andwhite schematic drawing of a face or a photograph of a face (as indicated to be the case in past
research) or will they find other faces (a cartoon character or a colorful abstract painting of a
baby) to be more appealing?
2. Does country of origin (cultural milieu) have an impact upon the aesthetic preferences of
infants?
3. Does watching television impact aesthetic choices for a popular cartoon character?
According to Allen & Marotz (2007, p. 30): The basic perceptual system is in place at birth.
Through experience, learning, and maturation, it develops into a smoothly coordinated operation
for processing complex information. Therefore, the significance of this study lies with the
importance of the relationship between early visual engagement, due to the aesthetic appeal of an
image, and the nurturing of visual discrimination skills, which are a vital part of a normal growth
process. Since the brain is growing quickly during this time period where neurons and connections
between cells are being formed, stimulating visual perception with aesthetic stimuli could be
beneficial to a young child.
370

Methodology
Pilot Study: choosing visual images of faces
In order to determine the kind of visuals and the best mechanism to use for childrens viewing, a
small pilot study was conducted with a random sample of 50 babies, aged 2 to 18 months. All the
parents of these children signed a consent form giving permission for their child to participate in
the study.
The following was determined in this phase of the research: which visual images of faces
were the most engaging to infants aged 2 to 18 months. Images were selected from the mass
media, which included picture books and mobiles for infants. These items are readily available in
stores that sell these products for babies. Using the criteria from the findings of earlier visual
preference research that has already been previously discussed, the black-and-white schematic
drawing of a babys face used in the Fantz (1963) study was selected (from the Infant Stim-Mobile
by Wimmer Ferguson), along with a color photograph of a white baby (taken from the book Baby
Talk, pub. Dorling Kindersley, 2005). However, it was determined in this pilot investigation that
when all of the African American children were given a choice between the photograph of a white
baby and the African American baby, they chose the African American baby. Therefore, both
photographs the white baby and the African American baby were included in the study for the
second phase of this research.
There were two remaining images to be determined: a colorful abstract image of a baby and a
cartoon image. These images were chosen using cues from the mass media with regard to what is
made available for babies in the marketplace. The children were shown a variety of colorful
abstracted images (faces only) of babies and cartoon characters. The pictures were placed on the
floor where the children would easily access them. The children were gently encouraged by their
childcare providers to go to this space so that they could look at the pictures. During one half hour
of observation, the childrens choices were documented. The choices were determined by fixation
time. This was indicated when a child looked at one of the pictures for at least 10 seconds. Other
body language was recorded as well, such as reaching for the preferred image, pointing to it,
smiling, etc. This same procedure was done at all five childcare centers that participated in the pilot
study.
After careful observation of the children, one colorful abstracted painting of a baby was
selected to be the most popular choice, where 40 out of the 50 children chose this image. For the
favorite cartoon image, the face of Dora the Explorer was chosen, where 45 out of the 50 children
chose this image.
In order to control any variables, the favored images in the pilot study of this investigation
were all faces (from the top of the head to just under the chin) that were facing forward and
smiling. All the faces had a white background and the overall brightness of the pictures was the
same. The final four selections are as follows: colored photographs of a baby (one white and one
African American baby); a black-and-white schematic drawing of a babys face; Dora the Explorer;
and a colorful abstracted painting of a baby in blues, greens and reds. All the visuals were mounted
on a piece of cardboard, each measuring 7 inches square, to control the size. Due to copyright
constraints, these images cannot be shown here.
Pilot Study: choosing a format to display the chosen visual images of faces
These favorite images were then placed in a variety of formats to determine which one was the
best in keeping the interest of the infant: a picture book format, a picture cube format, or pictures
placed on a black folding screen. The best visual format for this study was determined by the
interest of the baby and also by the ease of observation for the researcher. The infants tended to
chew and play with the picture book format and the picture cube, making it hard to determine
which image was of interest to them. Often, after playing with these manipulatives, the children
quickly lost interest or became distracted. The folded screen appeared to be the best format. The
babies tended to stay focused more and were not as easily distracted. The researcher, to observe
the child without being seen, used a peephole in the screen. Different sizes of screens were
experimented with, but ultimately a 20 x 30 inch black foam core screen proved to be the best size
371
for this research project. The peephole was in the center and 12 inches from the bottom edge of the
screen. It was a half inch square. It was found that an opening bigger than that was a distraction to
the babies. After the noted improvements, this folded black screen was used for the second phase of
the study.
The folded screen is a derivative of the research tools used by Davida Teller (1979) to
measure visual acuity. This has already been discussed and is referred to as forced-choice preferential
looking (FPL).
Phase Two: subject selection, observation of infants, and data collection
Subjects. During fall 2008, a sample of 126 infants (68 males and 58 females) was selected from early
childhood centers in a city in the US Midwest (n = 30; 19 males, 11 females) and also additional
selected sites around the world, including Australia (n = 30; 12 males, 18 females), New Zealand (n
= 26; 18 males, 8 females), Romania (n = 20; 9 males, 11 females), and England (n = 20; 10 males,
10 females). The childcare centers in the countries chosen for the study were those that had
indicated an interest in participating.
Overall, the participants in this phase of the study were children aged 2 to 18 months, with a
mean age of 12.84 months and a standard deviation (SD) of 4.33. The mean age for each country
was as follows: USA: 12.56 months; Australia: 13.50 months; New Zealand: 13.40 months;
Romania: 12.21 months; and England: 12.10 months. Overall, the number of children within each
age band was as follows: 2 to 4 months: n = 7; 5 to 8 months: n = 13; 9 to 12 months: n = 32; and 13
to 18 months: n = 74.
The infants from the United States were from lower-middle to middle-class families. The
Romanian infants were from an economically deprived Romani community. The Romani
(otherwise known by the offensive term gypsy) maintain aspects of the same culture with origins
in India, speak a specific dialect, and share a similar genetic make-up (Hancock, 2002). Out of
respect for the Romani, all are not economically deprived and illiterate. However, the group of
Romani that participated in this study were. Parents oftentimes were unemployed or worked on a
part-time basis. Because they were illiterate, their children were not exposed to any books,
including picture books and other forms of reading material. The infants in England were middle to
upper-middle class and resided in a university community. The Australian and New Zealand infants
also came from middle-class families.
It was believed that working with babies from around the world would provide a more
diverse sample since, as noted earlier, aesthetic preferences are influenced by the cultural milieu. As
Eisner (2002, p. 85) notes: frames of reference make a huge difference in what we see. Everyones
life experiences are different. Therefore, each will see the same thing differently. While infants have
had a limited amount of world experiences, each has been provided with an indigenous
environment where they can grow. What was important to this research project was how these
environments, including television exposure, may have impacted the aesthetic preferences of these
young children.
All the parents of these children signed a consent form and completed a survey questionnaire
in order to elicit the kind of television viewing that was provided to their child at home.
Observation of infants and data collection. Each baby was taken to a quiet location in the childcare
center where there was no interference from other children. This was where the folded screen had
been set up for viewing the four selected pictures of faces. Velcro strips were placed on the board
and on the back of each picture. The pictures were placed on the board in pairs at two locations at
the eye level of the child and at either side of the midline of the folded screen. There were six pairs,
in order to exhaust all the possible pairings of the faces. The ordered picture pairs were each
presented (one pair at a time, i.e. the colorful abstract painting of a baby was shown at the same
time as the photograph of a baby) to the subjects as follows:
1. Colorful abstract painting of a baby/1. Photograph of a baby;
2. Colorful abstract painting of a baby/2. Dora;
3. Colorful abstract painting of a baby/3. Black-and white drawing of a baby;
4. Photograph of a baby/4. Dora;
372

5. Photograph of a baby/5. Black-and-white drawing of a baby;
6. Dora/6. Black-and-white drawing of a baby.
Even though the pictures were displayed in the order described above, they were randomly placed
on the screen so that the same picture was not always on the same side of the board. For example,
since the first three picture pairs included the colorful abstract painting of a baby, this image was
not always placed on the left side of the screen. Doing this helped to alleviate a potential problem
of a child always favoring a particular side, instead of really looking at the picture.
The child sat on the lap of a childcare provider or the parent at a distance of 40 centimeters
from the screen. The researcher sat behind the folded screen that displayed the picture pairs. The
child was viewed by the researcher through the small peephole. The researcher did not know
which picture was placed on which side of the display board because an assistant researcher placed
these into position. The researcher had to make a blind decision or forced choice as to which side
the infant preferred. Behavior by the infant served as a cue to help the researcher decide. Eye
movements, head movements, pointing, facial expressions, and even pulling the favored picture off
of the display screen were some of the ways that determined the choice of the child. The
observation period was under the control of the researcher and did not exceed 10 seconds for each
picture pair.
The babys responses to these stimuli were determined by visual fixation. Each babys visual
fixation was observed as images were provided (see Figure 1). The images that provoked a visual
fixation of a 10-second time frame (determined by the use of a stopwatch), were the ones
determined to be of interest to the baby. The aesthetic preferences of each child were recorded on
a survey form prepared by the principle investigator. The age, gender and ethnicity of the child
were recorded along with observational notes about head/eye movement, body language, and
vocal sounds.
When children displayed behavior that they did not want to participate, the data collection
was stopped and the child was given an opportunity at another time to view the pictures. No child
was ever forced to participate if they chose not to do so. There were three children who were
dropped from the study because they were not comfortable in participating.
Figure 1. Mother with baby looking at images on black screen with researcher observing from behind.
Parental survey. The parents were given a questionnaire to complete at the same time they were
given the consent form. This was done prior to observing the children. The survey form included
the following two questions: (1) Does your child watch television? and (2) If so, please list their
favorite shows. Because the Romani parents could not read or speak English, a translator read the
questions and the researcher recorded the responses.
373
Data Analysis and Interpretation
Preferences for Faces: which faces children liked the best
Keeping in mind that the first research question asks if more than 50% of infants will prefer a
particular image in each picture pair, a one-tail test for proportion at the .05 level was done for each
of the six picture pairs. The hypotheses were: H0: p .50 and H1: p .50. As indicated in Table I,
when looking at those six picture pairs, the infants aged 2 to 18 months (n = 126) had the following
aesthetic preferences:
1. The photograph, when viewed with the colorful abstract painting, yielded a z-score of 2.31 and
was significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring the
abstract painting is more than 50%.
2. Dora, when paired with the colorful abstract painting, resulted in a z-score of 4.63 and was
significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children who prefer Dora is
greater than 50%.
3. The black-and-white schematic drawing, when compared to the abstract painting, yielded a zscore of 3.73 and was significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children
preferring the black-and-white drawing is greater than 50%.
4. Dora, when viewed with the photograph, yielded a z-score of 0.898 and was significant. The
null hypothesis is not rejected. The preference for Dora is less than 50%.
5. There was a z-score of 0.00 for the pairing of the photograph with the black-and-white
schematic drawing. The null hypothesis is not rejected. The preference for either image is not
greater than 50%.
6. When Dora was viewed with the black-and-white schematic drawing, the z-score was 3.03 and
was significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is
greater than 50%.
Picture pair
1. Photograph, versus
abstract painting
2. Abstract painting, versus
Dora
black-and-white drawing
Dora
6. Dora, versus
Sample proportion
preferring a
particular image
0.396
0.603
0.293
0.706
0.333
0.666
0.460
0.540
0.500
0.500
0.635
0.365
z-score at .05
level
2.31*
4.63*
3.73*
0.898
0.00
3.03*
*significant at .05 level.

Table I. One-tail test for proportion (at 50%) to determine aesthetic
preferences for images of infants aged 2 to 18 months (n = 126).
When looking at the data according to age bands, the results of the one-tail test for proportion at
the 0.05 level for the six picture pairs are shown in Table II, for infants aged 2 to 12 months, where
n = 52. The hypotheses were: H0: p .50 and H1: p .50.
1. With the pairing of the abstract painting and the photograph, a z-score of -1.67 was obtained.
The null hypothesis is not rejected.
2. The pairing of Dora with the abstract painting yielded a z-score of 2.77 and was significant. The
null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is greater than 50%.
3. The abstract painting, when paired with the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 2.49
and was significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring the
black-and-white drawing is greater than 50%.
374

4. A z-score of 1.11 was the result of the pairing of the photograph and Dora. This was not
significant. The null hypothesis is not rejected. The proportion of children preferring the
photograph is less than 50%.
5. The photograph, when paired with the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 0.274 and
was not significant. The null hypothesis is not rejected. The proportion of children preferring
the photograph is less than 50%.
6. Dora, when compared to the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 1.65 and was
significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is more
than 50%.
Picture pair
abstract painting
Dora
Dora
6. Dora, versus
Sample proportion
preferring a
particular image
0.384
0.615
0.307
0.692
0.327
0.673
0.577
0.423
0.519
0.481
0.615
0.385
z-score at .05
level
-1.67
2.77*
2.49*
1.11
0.274
1.65*
*significant at .05 level.

Table II. One-tail test for proportion (at 50%) to determine aesthetic
When looking at the data according to age bands, the results of the one-tail test for proportion at
the .05 level for the six picture pairs are shown in Table III for infants aged 13 to 18 months, where
n = 74. The hypotheses were: H0: p .50 and H1: p .50.
1. There was a z-score of 1.63, which was not significant, for the pairing of the photograph and
the abstract painting. The null hypothesis is not rejected. The proportion of children preferring
the photograph is less than 50%.
2. The pairing of Dora with the abstract painting yielded a z-score of 3.72 and was significant. The
null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is greater than 50%.
3. The abstract painting, when paired with the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 2.79
and was significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring the
black-and-white drawing is greater than 50%.
4. A z-score of 2.10 was the result of the pairing of the photograph and Dora. This was significant.
The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is greater than 50%.
5. The photograph, when paired with the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 0.241 and
was not significant. The null hypothesis is not rejected. The proportion of children preferring
the black-and-white drawing is less than 50%.
6. Dora, when compared to the black-and-white drawing, yielded a z-score of 2.56 and was
significant. The null hypothesis is rejected. The proportion of children preferring Dora is
greater than 50%.
375
Picture pair
abstract painting
Dora
Dora
6. Dora, versus
Sample proportion
preferring a
particular image
0.410
0.595
0.283
0.716
0.338
0.662
0.378
0.622
0.486
0.514
0.649
0.351
z-score at .05
level
1.63
3.72*
2.79*
2.10*
0.241
2.56*
*significant at 0.05 level.

Table III. One-tail test for proportion (at 50%) to determine aesthetic
Cross-cultural Differences and Similarities

In order to determine if country of origin has an impact upon aesthetic preferences, chi-squares
were calculated (with four degrees of freedom at the 0.05 level) for each picture pair. The results
that were obtained for children aged 2 to 18 months, where n = 126, can be found in Table IV.
1. For the pairing of the abstract painting and the photograph, the chi-square was 4.24 and was
not significant. Country of origin did not have an impact on aesthetic preferences for this
picture pair.
2. The abstract painting paired with Dora yielded a chi-square of 7.47 and was not significant.
Country of origin did not have an impact on aesthetic preferences for this picture pair.
3. A chi-square of 6.12 was calculated for the pairing of the abstract painting and the black-andwhite drawing. It was not significant. Country of origin did not have an impact on aesthetic
preferences for this picture pair.
4. The photograph, when compared to Dora, yielded a chi-square of 7.03. It was not significant.
5. A chi-square of 8.30 was calculated for the photograph and the black-and-white drawing, and
was significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an impact on preferences
for this picture pair.
6. Dora, when paired with the black-and-white drawing, yielded a chi-square of 10.90 and was
significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an impact on preferences for
this picture pair.
Picture pairs
Abstract
United States
fo* = 10
fe** = 12.00
Romania
fo = 7
fe = 8.00
England
fo = 12
fe = 8.00
Australia
fo = 11
fe = 12,00
New Zealand
fo = 10
fe = 10.50
fo = 20
fe = 18.24
fo = 13
fe = 12.60
fo = 8
fe = 12.60
fo = 19
fe = 18.24
fo = 16
fe = 15.96
fo = 11
fe = 8.88
fo = 4
fe = 5.92
fo = 7
fe = 5.92
fo = 12
fe = 8.88
fo = 3
fe = 7.77
fo = 19
fe = 21.36
fo = 16
fe = 14.24
fo = 13
fe = 14.24
fo = 18
fe = 21.36
fo = 23
fe = 18.69
fo = 8
fe = 10.08
fo = 9
fe = 6.72
fo = 7
fe = 6.72
fo = 6
fe = 10.08
fo = 12
fe = 8.82
Chi-square
4.24
versus
photo
Abstract
7.47
versus
Dora
Abstract
versus
376
6.12

black-andwhite
drawing
Photo
fo = 22
fe = 20.16
fo = 11
fe = 13.44
fo = 13
fe = 13.44
fo = 24
fe = 20.16
fo = 14
fe = 17.64
fo = 10
fe = 13.92
fo = 14
fe = 9.28
fo = 10
fe = 9.28
fo = 12
fe = 13.92
fo = 12
fe = 12.18
fo = 20
fe = 16.32
fo = 6
fe = 10.88
fo = 10
fe = 10.88
fo = 18
fe = 16.32
fo = 14
fe = 14.28
fo = 9
fe = 15.12
fo = 14
fe = 10.08
fo = 11
fe = 10.08
fo = 15
fe = 15.12
fo = 14
fe = 13.23
fo = 21
fe = 15.12
fo = 6
fe = 10.08
fo = 9
fe = 10.88
fo = 15
fe = 15.12
fo = 12
fe = 13.23
fo = 20
fe = 19.20
fo = 14
fe = 12.80
fo = 13
fe = 12.80
fo = 12
fe = 19.20
fo = 21
fe = 16.80
fo = 10
fe = 11.04
fo = 6
fe = 7.36
fo = 7
fe = 7.36
fo = 18
fe = 11.04
fo = 5
fe = 9.66
7.03
versus
Dora
Photo
8.30***
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
Dora
10.90***
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
*observed frequencies; **estimated frequencies; ***significant at 0.05 level with four degrees of freedom.
Table IV. Chi-squares: preferences for images with regard to country of origin of infants aged 2 to 18 months (n = 126).
When broken down into age bands, the chi-square calculations (with four degrees of freedom at
the .05 level) are shown in Table V for infants aged 2 to 12 months, where n = 52.
1. The abstract painting, when paired with the photograph, yielded a chi-square of 1.92 and was
picture pair.
2. A chi-square of 6.15 was calculated for the pairing of the abstract painting and Dora. It was not
significant. Country of origin did not have an impact on aesthetic preferences for this picture
pair.
3. The pairing of the abstract painting with the black-and-white-drawing resulted in a chi-square
of 2.05, which was not significant. Country of origin did not have an impact on aesthetic
4. The photograph, when paired with Dora, yielded a chi-square of 6.61 and was not significant.
5. A chi-square of 8.78 resulted with the pairing of the photograph and the black-and-white
drawing. It was significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an impact on
the preferences of infants with regard to this picture pair.
6. Dora, when compared to the black-and-white drawing, yielded a chi-square of 3.26, which was
picture pair.
377
Picture pairs
Abstract
United States
fo* = 5
fe** = 6.20
Romania
fo = 3
fe = 3.00
England
fo = 5
fe = 3.80
Australia
fo = 5
fe = 3.80
New Zealand
fo = 2
fe = 3.00
fo = 11
fe = 9.92
fo = 4
fe = 4.96
fo = 5
fe = 4.80
fo = 4
fe = 2.40
fo = 5
fe = 6.08
fo = 4
fe = 3.04
fo = 5
fe = 6.08
fo = 4
fe = 3.04
fo = 6
fe = 4.80
fo = 0
fe = 2.40
fo = 12
fe = 11.16
fo = 4
fe = 5.27
fo = 4
fe = 5.40
fo = 4
fe = 2.55
fo = 6
fe = 6.84
fo = 3
fe = 3.23
fo = 6
fe = 6.84
fo = 4
fe = 3.23
fo = 8
fe = 5.40
fo = 2
fe = 2.55
fo = 12
fe = 10.85
fo = 4
fe = 5.25
fo = 7
fe = 6.65
fo = 6
fe = 6.65
fo = 6
fe = 5.25
fo = 6
fe = 9.30
fo = 7
fe = 4.50
fo = 7
fe = 5.70
fo = 5
fe = 5.70
fo = 5
fe = 4.50
fo = 10
fe = 6.82
fo = 5
fe = 8.37
fo = 1
fe = 3.30
fo = 7
fe = 4.05
fo = 3
fe = 4.18
fo = 4
fe = 5.13
fo = 5
fe = 4.18
fo = 7
fe = 5.13
fo = 3
fe = 3.30
fo = 4
fe = 4.05
fo = 11
fe = 7.75
fo = 1
fe = 3.75
fo = 6
fe = 4.75
fo = 3
fe = 4.75
fo = 4
fe = 3.75
fo = 10
fe = 9.92
fo = 6
fe = 4.80
fo = 6
fe = 6.08
fo = 4
fe = 6.08
fo = 6
fe = 4.80
fo = 6
fe = 6.20
fo = 2
fe = 3.00
fo = 4
fe = 3.80
fo = 6
fe = 3.80
fo = 2
fe = 3.00
Chi-square
1.92
versus
photo
Abstract
6.15
versus
Dora
Abstract
2.05
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
Photo
6.61
versus
Dora
Photo
8.78***
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
Dora
3.26
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
*observed frequencies; **estimated frequencies; *** significant at 0.05 level with four degrees of freedom.
Table V. Chi-squares: preferences for images with regard to country of origin of infants aged 2 to 12 months (n = 52).
The chi-square calculations (with four degrees of freedom at the 0.05 level) are shown in Table VI
for infants aged 13 to 18 months, where n = 74.
1. The abstract painting, when paired with the photograph, yielded a chi-square of 4.92. It was not
significant. Country of origin appears not to have an impact on aesthetic preferences for this
picture pair.
2. A chi-square of 10.62 was calculated for the pairing of the abstract painting and Dora. It was
significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an impact on aesthetic
3. The pairing of the abstract painting with the black-and-white drawing resulted in a chi-square
of 42.74, which was significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an
impact on aesthetic preferences for this picture pair.
4. The photograph, when paired with Dora, yielded a chi-square of 3.03 and was not significant.
5. A chi-square of 5.43 resulted with the pairing of the photograph and the black-and-white
drawing. It was not significant. Country of origin does not appear to have an impact on the
preferences of infants with regard to this picture pair.
378

6. Dora, when compared to the black-and-white drawing, yielded a chi-square of 8.47, which was
significant. Looking at the data, country of origin appears to have an impact on aesthetic
Picture pairs
Abstract
United States
fo* = 5
fe** = 5.70
Romania
fo = 4
fe = 4.80
England
fo = 7
fe = 4.20
Australia
fo = 6
fe = 8.10
New Zealand
fo = 8
fe = 7.20
fo = 9
fe = 8.36
fo = 8
fe = 7.04
fo = 3
fe = 6.16
fo = 14
fe = 11.88
fo = 10
fe = 10.56
fo = 7
fe = 3.99
fo = 0
fe = 3.36
fo = 3
fe = 2.94
fo = 8
fe = 5.67
fo = 3
fe = 5.04
fo = 7
fe = 10.07
fo = 4
fe = 4.75
fo = 12
fe = 8.48
fo = 5
fe = 4.00
fo = 7
fe = 7.42
fo = 4
fe = 3.50
fo = 12
fe = 14.31
fo = 2
fe = 6.75
fo = 15
fe = 12.72
fo = 10
fe = 6.00
fo = 10
fe = 1.90
fo = 7
fe = 7.84
fo = 6
fe = 6.86
fo = 18
fe = 13.23
fo = 8
fe = 11.76
fo = 4
fe = 5.32
fo = 7
fe = 4.48
fo = 3
fe = 3.92
fo = 7
fe = 7.56
fo = 7
fe = 6.72
fo = 10
fe = 8.74
fo = 4
fe = 6.84
fo = 5
fe = 7.36
fo = 7
fe = 5.76
fo = 7
fe = 6.44
fo = 7
fe = 5.04
fo = 13
fe = 12.42
fo = 8
fe = 9.72
fo = 11
fe = 11.04
fo = 10
fe = 8.64
fo = 10
fe = 7.22
fo = 5
fe = 6.08
fo = 3
fe = 5.32
fo = 12
fe = 10.26
fo = 8
fe = 9.12
fo = 10
fe = 9.12
fo = 8
fe = 7.68
fo = 7
fe = 6.72
fo = 8
fe = 12.96
fo = 15
fe = 11.52
fo = 4
fe = 4.94
fo = 4
fe = 4.16
fo = 3
fe = 3.64
fo = 12
fe = 7.02
fo = 3
fe = 6.24
Chi-square
4.92
versus
photo
Abstract
10.62***
versus
Dora
Abstract
42.74***
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
Photo
3.03
versus
Dora
Photo
5.43
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
Dora
8.47***
versus
black-andwhite
drawing
*observed frequencies; **estimated frequencies; ***significant at 0.05 level with four degrees of freedom.
Table VI. Chi-squares: preferences for images with regard to country of origin of infants aged 13 to 18 months (n = 74).
The Impact of Watching Television on the Aesthetic Preferences for Faces

Out of a total of 126 children, 116 (92%) of the parents responded to a survey. The survey was used
to provide some insight into the television exposure that parents were providing for their children.
For the US parents, 27% indicated on the survey that their children watched television, which
mostly consisted of cartoons. Eighty-seven percent of the Romani parents indicated that their
children watched television, which also included mostly cartoons. According to 55% of the parents
in England, their children watched predominantly cartoons on television. As indicated by their
parents, 65% of Australian children watched cartoons on television. In New Zealand, 45% of the
children watched cartoons on television. However, not knowing how often children watched
379
television impedes any conclusions that can be drawn. Therefore, what follows is for informational
purposes only.
Out of 116 infants aged 2 to 18 months, 66 (57%) watched television. When asked specifically
what shows were watched, the parents indicated that their children watched a variety of cartoon
shows. Only 1% of them indicated specifically that their child watched Dora. According to age
bands, 50% of the 2- to 12-month-old children (n = 48) watched television, while 63% of the 13- to
18-month-old children (n = 67) watched television. If we look at the data according to country (see
Table VII), the highest percentage of children watching television was in Australia with 66% (n =
20), followed by Romania with 60% (n = 12) and the United States with 60% (n = 12), then England
with 58% (n = 11). The lowest percentage of television watching was in New Zealand with 33% (n
= 9).
Country
Percentage of children
who watch television
66
60
60
58
33
Australia
Romania
United States
England
New Zealand
Number of children
in each country
30
20
20
19
27
Table VII. Percentage of children aged 2 to 18 months who watch television (n = 116).
However, when looking at the children in each country, the number of times they chose Dora out
of the three picture pairs and whether they watched television or not, all chi-squares were not
significant at the 0.05 level with three degrees of freedom (see Table VIII). This suggests that
television watching does not appear to impact the choice for Dora.
United States n=20
Watch Television
versus
Dont Watch
Television
Chose Dora 0
Times
fo*=3
fe**=1.80
Chose Dora 1
Time
fo=5
fe=4.80
Chose Dora 2
Times
fo=0
fe=1.80
Chose Dora 3
Times
fo=4
fe=3.60
fo=0
fe=1.20
fo=3
fe=3.20
fo=3
fe=1.20
fo=2
fe=2.40
Chose Dora 0
Times
fo=2
fe=1.76
Chose Dora 1
Time
fo=3
fe=2.86
Chose Dora 2
Times
fo=2
fe=2.31
Chose Dora 3
Times
fo=4
fe=4.07
fo=1
fe=1.28
fo=2
fe=2.08
fo=2
fe=1.68
fo=3
fe=2.96
Chose Dora 0
Times
fo=0
fe=0
Chose Dora
1 Time
fo=4
fe=4.20
Chose Dora 2
Times
fo=7
fe=7.70
Chose Dora 3
Times
fo=3
fe=2.10
fo=0
fe=0
fo=2
fe=1.80
fo=4
fe=3.30
fo=0
fe=.90
Chose Dora 0
Times
fo=2
fe=1.40
Chose Dora
1 Time
fo=10
fe=10
Chose Dora 2
Times
fo=7
fe=6.60
Chose Dora 3
Times
fo=1
fe=2
fo=0
fe=.70
fo=5
fe=5
fo=3
fe=3.30
fo=2
fe=3
Chi Square
6.63
England n=19
Watch Television
Versus
Dont Watch
Television
.208
Romania n=20
Watch Television
versus
Dont Watch
Television
1.41
Australia = 30
Watch Television
versus
Dont Watch
Television
380
1.84

New Zealand n=27
Watch Television
versus
Dont Watch
Television
Chose Dora 0
Times
fo=0
fe=.48
Chose Dora
1 Time
fo=2
fe=1.32
fo=1
fo=1
fe=.60
fe=1.65
*observed frequencs; *estimated frequencies.
Chose Dora 2
Times
fo=5
fe=5.76
Chose Dora 3
Times
fo=5
fe=4.44
fo=8
fe=7.20
fo=5
fe=5.55
1.76
Table VIII. Chi-squares for children in each country aged 2 to 18 months who watch television.
Discussion
Infants Responses to Visual Stimuli
In response to the first research question, over 50% of the infants aged 2 to 18 months preferred
Dora the Explorer when paired with the abstract painting, and also the black-and-white schematic
drawing. When looking at the data via age bands, the results are the same for children aged 2 to 12
months. However, for children aged 13 to 18 months, Dora was preferred in all three picture
pairings with the photograph, the black-and-white schematic drawing, and the abstract painting.
Perhaps the preference for Dora may be attributed to these older children having more television
or mass media exposure. But, as noted earlier, not knowing the number of times Dora was
watched impedes any conclusions that can be drawn. Also, for this study, watching television does
not appear to impact aesthetic preferences for this particular image.
Dora the Explorer and Mass Media Influence
Dora, as a preferred image, is a new finding for this type of research. Mass media images have not
been used as stimuli in preference research with children in this age group. And further, the results
of this research are intriguing, as they do not support earlier research that indicates babies prefer
photographs of faces and high-contrast black-and-white images of a baby, although the black-andwhite schematic drawing was a preferred choice when compared to the abstract painting. This
preference will be discussed later. Now, what is even more interesting is that while 57% of these
children watched television, only a small number (1%) watched Dora. And, as noted earlier,
television watching does not appear to impact aesthetic preferences for this group of children.
However, the results may have been different if 100% of the parents had responded to the survey
gleaning information about television-watching habits. Also, not knowing the number of times the
children watched Dora or had been exposed to her image is the unknown variable. Therefore, it
cannot be concluded that mass media influences, other than television watching, have an effect on
children choosing Dora as their favorite image. So why did they choose her? It can be speculated
that children may like the image of Dora, not necessarily because they might have seen her image
or like images in the visual culture of their environment, but because they may enjoy the highcontrast image with exaggerated features and her big eyes.
When the researchers in this study observed the children, they appeared to really fixate on
Doras eyes. Many of them responded to her image with a smile on their face and some reached for
her. More gregarious children tried to pull her image off of the display screen. It will be recalled
that previous research (Zusne, 1970; Dodwell et al, 1987; Geldart et al, 1999) does indicate that
infants are attracted to the eyes when presented with a face. Eric Jensen (2006) supports this as well.
He informs us that the human visual brain is wired to respond to perceptions with more elements
in the top half of our field of vision. The current research tends to support this.
Having children view other popular cartoon images, along with Dora, may produce different
results, since most cartoon images are of high contrast and many characters have large eyes as well.
It is suggested that more investigation is needed in this area.
381
A Look at the Other Images and How Infants Responded to Them
Black-and-white schematic drawing of a baby. The earlier research by Fantz (1963) is somewhat
supported here with regard to the black-and-white schematic drawing of a baby. When given a
choice, over 50% of the children aged 2 to 18 months, as well as the age bands 2 to 12 months and
13 to 18 months, selected this image when compared to the abstract painting. It was not chosen as
a favorite with any other picture pair.
Choice is the operative word here. In Fantzs earlier research, children did not have a
selection of other images to choose from. When provided with a choice in this research, the blackand-white schematic drawing was preferred over the colorful painting. This finding is different
from the research of Lewis et al (1966), where children focused longer on a photograph that was
paired with a linear drawing of a face. In the present research, the frequency of choices between the
photograph and the schematic drawing was very close and none of the chi-squares reached
significance in any of the age bands. It can be speculated that the black-and-white schematic
drawing was chosen because it is a simple rendering and of high contrast in comparison to the
colorful painting and the photograph.
Photograph of a baby. It is somewhat surprising that the photograph of the baby was not a popular
choice in this research. It was not chosen by any age band as a favorite in any of the tests for
proportion. This finding does not support the earlier research (Maurer & Barrera, 1981; Duuren et
al, 2009) that infants enjoy viewing photographs, especially of babies. This lack of choice for the
photograph is an additional new finding.
One thing to consider with regard to the photograph is what would happen if a personal
photograph of each child were shown along with the other visuals used in this research. Would
Dora still be the first choice? Once again, more investigation is needed in this area using a larger
sample.
The present research had some interesting results with regard to the photograph and children
of color. The white baby was shown to white children and the African American baby was shown
to children of color. While the white children did not always choose the photograph of the white
baby in the various picture pairs, all of the children of color (n = 8) chose the photograph of the
African American baby. This suggests that children will most likely choose a photograph of a child
that most resembles them. This finding is supported by previous research with three-month-old
children of color (Quinn et al, 2005).
Colorful abstract painting of a baby. In this research, the colorful abstract painting was chosen when
paired with the photograph for 2- to 18-month-old children. However, overall, the colorful abstract
painting of a baby was the least preferred image for the children. When looking at age bands, it was
not preferred for any of the picture pairs for children aged 2 to 12 months and 13 to 18 months.
These findings support earlier studies where infants preferred the natural arrangement of a face as
opposed to an abstracted face (Maurer & Barrera, 1981).
Other research carried out with slightly older children (age two) indicates that colorful and
bold and abstracted images are preferred (Danko-McGhee, 2000). This is obviously not the case for
children younger than two. Yet, when we look at toys and picture books that are available for this
age group, there is a plethora of bold colors.
Aesthetic Preferences of Children from Various Cultures
The second research question focuses on the impact of culture on aesthetic preferences. While data
was collected from children in England, Romania, Australia, New Zealand and the United States,
the sample sizes in each country were too small to take a serious look at any cultural differences.
Nevertheless, that information will be reported to provide some insight.
Looking at the data according to age bands, for children aged 2 to 12 months, the only
significant chi-square was for the picture pair of the photograph and the black-and-white schematic
drawing. Here, the children in the United States had a stronger preference for the black-and-white
drawing than the children in the other countries.
382

For 13- to 18-month-old children, Dora was a clear favorite for children in New Zealand when
her image was paired with the abstract painting and also the black-and-white schematic drawing.
For the pairing of the abstract painting and the black-and-white schematic drawing, children in
Australia expressed a stronger preference for the black-and-white schematic drawing compared to
the children in the other countries. These children also favored the black-and-white schematic
drawing when paired with Dora.
It is obvious from these results that country of origin does have an impact upon aesthetic
preferences. This is a new finding. Certainly, the visual environment provided for children in each
country should be considered as a possible variable, with more investigation needed. Dissanyake
(2001) indicates that there may be a connection between the environment and aesthetic
preferences. Considering the visual stimuli in the home, including the kinds of pictures hanging on
the walls, picture books that are read, and mobiles that are suspended over cribs, would provide a
much clearer insight about how these variables might impact aesthetic preferences.
Effect of Watching Television and Aesthetic Preferences
The third research question is concerned with watching television and the impact on childrens
aesthetic choices. Since parents had indicated on the survey that their children watched cartoons
(the top favorites included The Wiggles and In the Night Garden), perhaps these were chosen for
sound effects and not necessarily the images. For example, The Wiggles has a lot of singing and In
the Night Garden has music and sound effects. This auditory stimulation may compete with the
visual imagery. Whatever the case may be, more investigation is needed here. Perhaps these visual
images (that are high contrast and simple) may have had an impact upon these childrens choice for
Dora. A consideration is the failure of the survey to specifically ask if children watched Dora and
also how many times she was watched on television. The parents were only asked if their children
watched television and to list their favorite programs. It was believed by the researcher that leaving
the question more open-ended would produce a more unbiased response. More thought needs to
be put into developing a better survey instrument as perhaps the current one is a weakness in this
study. Having a 100% response rate would help here as well.
It is interesting to point out that children in New Zealand had the lowest rate of watching
television, yet Dora was favored by the 13- to 18-month-old children when her image was
compared to the abstract painting and also the black-and-white schematic drawing. This also
suggests that perhaps television exposure may not be a factor here in affecting this aesthetic choice.
If watching television does not appear to have an impact, then children may like Dora because they
really like her face, or they may have seen her image elsewhere (i.e. products that bear her image),
causing them to choose her image because they were familiar with her. At this point, all that can be
said is that while children in this research sample preferred Dora, watching television did not
appear to have an impact on this choice.
Another Unexpected Finding
There were four sets of twins in this research. Each child was observed separately. The results
indicate that twins chose almost identical images. This warrants another research investigation
exclusively with twin populations.
Closing Remarks
Preferring the image of Dora is the new finding for this study, which suggests that a mass media
image does have an aesthetic appeal for young children, especially in New Zealand. Perhaps using
her image or ones similar to her would be appropriate to display for visual stimulation for children
in this sample. It is also clear from this research that country of origin does have an impact on the
aesthetic choices of infants. In addition to the choice for Dora in New Zealand, Australian children
preferred the black-and-white schematic drawing. For these particular children, perhaps more
black-and-white images could be used for visual stimulation in the form of mobiles, picture books,
etc.
383
While this research has answered some questions, many new ones have manifested
themselves. Such a line of inquiry is important for parents, early childhood educators and toy
manufacturers, and can provide a better sense of the type of visual stimulation young children aged
2 to 18 months prefer. Visual stimulation involves cognitive processes and, as indicated earlier in
this article, the first years of life are critical with regard to learning. Providing a stimulating
environment that includes visuals which children prefer can contribute to their cognitive growth
process. Considering the visual interests of the child is a good place to start with regard to
facilitating growth and learning for the infant.
Notes
[1] See aesthetic, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/aesthetic
[2] See preference, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/preference
References
Abbs, P. (1987) Promoting Aesthetic Appreciation in Young Children, in S. Wright (Ed.) The Arts in Early
Childhood. Sydney: Prentice Hall.
Adams, R. & Courage, M. (1995) Development of Chromatic Discrimination in Early Infancy, Behavioral
Brain Research, 67(1), 99-101. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0166-4328(94)00143-4
Allen, K. & Marotz, L. (2007) Developmental Profiles: pre-birth through twelve. Clifton Park, NY: Delmar
Learning.
Amigo, C. (1972) Visuo-sensory Development of the Child, American Journal of Optometry and Archives of
American Academy of Optometry, 49(12), 991-1001.
Anderson, R. (2004) Calliopes Sisters: a comparative study of philosophies of art. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
Aslin, R. (1982) A Commentary, in G. Bronson (Ed.) The Scanning Patterns of Human Infants: implications for
visual learners. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Atkinson, J. (2000) The Developing Visual Brain. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bednar, J. & Miikkulainen, R. (2003) Learning Innate Face Preferences, Neural Computation, 15(7), 1525-1557.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/089976603321891792
Bergen, D. & Coscia, J. (2001) Brain Research and Childhood Education. Olney, MD: Association for Childhood
Education International.
Berk, L.E. (2005) Infants and Children: prenatal through middle childhood, 5th edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education.
Bornstein, M., Ferdinandsen, K. & Gross, G. (1981) Perception of Symmetry in Infancy, Developmental
Psychology. 17(1), 82-86. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.17.1.82
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Postscript: towards a vulgar critique of pure critiques, in P. Bourdieu (Ed.) Distinction: a
social critique of the judgement of taste. London: Routledge.
Bower, T.G.R. (1976) Repetitive Processes in Child Development, Scientific American, 235(5), 38-47.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1176-38
Bronson, G.W. (1974) The Postnatal Growth of Visual Capacity, Child Development, 45(4), 873-890.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1128073
Bronson, G.W. (1990) Changes in Infant Visual Scanning across the 2-to-14-Week Period, Journal of
Experimental Child Psychology, 49(1), 101-125. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(90)90051-9
Brotherson, S. (2005) Understanding Brain Development in Young Children.
http://www.ag.ndsu.edu/pubs/yf/famsci/fs609w.htm
Cold, B., Kolstad, A. & Larssaether, S. (1998) Aesthetics, Well-being and Health: abstracts on theoretical and
empirical research within environmental aesthetics. Oslo: Norsk Form.
Danko-McGhee, K. (2000) The Aesthetic Preferences of Young Children. Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen Press.
DeCasper, A. & Fifer, W.P. (1980) Of Human Bonding: newborns prefer their mothers voices, Science,
208(4448), 1174-1176. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.7375928
384

De Haan, M. (2001) The Neuropsychology of Face Processing during Infancy and Childhood, in C.A. Nelson
& M. Luciana (Eds) Handbook of Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dissanyake, E. (2001) Aesthetic Incunabula, Philosophy and Literature, 25(2), 335-346.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/phl.2001.0026
Dodwell, P., Humphrey, K. & Muir, D. (1987) Shape and Pattern Perception, in P. Salapatek & L. Cohen
(Eds) Handbook of Infant Perception: from perception to cognition, vol. 2. New York: Academic Press.
Duncum, P. (2004) Visual Culture Isnt Just Visual: multiliteracy, multimodality, and meaning, Studies in Art
Education, 45(3), 252-264.
Duuren, M., Kendell-Scott, L. & Stark, N. (2009) Early Aesthetic Choices: infant preferences for attractive
premature infant faces, Advances in Psychological Science, 17(6), 1234-1241.
Eisner, E. (2002) The Arts and the Creation of Mind. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Eliot, L. (1999) Whats Going on in There? How the Brain and Mind Develop in the First Five Years of Life. New
York: Bantam.
Epstein, A.S. & Trimis, E. (2002) Supporting Young Artists: the development of the visual arts in young children.
Ypsilanti, MI: High Scope Press.
Fantz, R.L. (1963) Pattern Vision in Newborn Infants, Science, 140(3564), 296-297.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.140.3564.296
Fantz, R.L., Ordy, J.M. & Udelf, M.S. (1962) Maturation of Pattern Vision in Infants during the First Six
Months, Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 55(6), 907-917.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0044173
Freedman, K. (2003) Teaching Visual Culture. New York: Teachers College Press & National Art Education
Association.
Garoian, C. & Gaudelius, Y. (2004) The Spectacle of Visual Culture, Studies in Art Education, 45(4), 298-312.
Geldart, S., Maurer, D. & Carney, K. (1999) Effects of Eye Size on Adults Aesthetic Ratings of Faces and Five
Month Olds Looking Times, Perception, 28(3), 361-374. http://dx.doi.org/10.1068/p2885
Goren, C.C., Sarty, M. & Wu, P.Y.K. (1975) Visual Following and Pattern Discrimination of Face-like Stimuli
by Newborn Infants, Pediatrics, 56(4), 544-549.
Haith, M. (1978) Visual Competence in Early Infancy, in R. Held, H. Leibowitz & H.L. Teuber (Eds)
Handbook of Sensory Physiology, vol. 8. Berlin: Springer.
Hancock, I. (2002) We Are the Romani People. Hatfield: University of Hertfordshire Press.
Healy, J.M. (2004) Early Television Experience and Subsequent Attention Problems in Children, Pediatrics,
113(4), 917-918. http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.113.4.917-a
Heifetz, M.D. (1966) The Aesthetic Principle, Srt Journal, 25(4), 372-376.
Hofsten, C. von (1982) EyeHand Coordination in Newborns, Developmental Psychology, 18(3), 450-461.
Hogan, D.M. (1998) Valuing the Child in Research: historical and current influences on research
methodology with children, in D.M. Hogan & R. Gilligan (Eds) Researching Childrens Experiences:
qualitative approaches. Dublin: Childrens Research Centre, Trinity College, Dublin.
Honig, A. (2003) Beauty for Babies, Scholastic Early Childhood Today, 17(7), 22-25.
Hood, D. (2000) Is Advertising to Kids Wrong? Marketers Respond, Kidscreen, 15 November.
Hooper-Greenhill, E. (2000) Museums and the Interpretation of Visual Culture. London: Routledge.
Jensen, E. (2006) Enriching the Brain: how to maximize every learners potential. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Johnson, H.L. (2007) Aesthetic Experience and Early Language and Literacy Development, Early Childhood
Development and Care, 177(3), 311-320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03004430500495576
Johnson, M.H., Dziurawiec, S., Hadyn, E. & Morton, J. (1991) Newborns Preferential Tracking of Face-like
Stimuli and Its Subsequent Decline, Cognition, 40(1/2), 1-19.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90045-6
Johnson, M.H. & Morton, J. (1991) Biology and Cognitive Development. Oxford: Blackwell.
Kagan, J., Henker, B.A., Hen-tou, A. & Lewis, M. (1966) Infants Differential Reactions to Familiar and
Distorted Faces, Child Development, 37(3), 519-532. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1126676
Keel, J.S. (1972) The Roots of Aesthetic Experience, Art Education, 25(3), 4-7.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3191676
King, J.A., Atkinson, J., Braddick, O., Nokes, L. & Braddick, F. (1996) Target Preference and Movement
Kinematics Reflect Development of Visuomotor Modules in the Reaching of Human Infants,
Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 37: S526.
385
Kovach, B. & Da Ros-Voseles, D. (2008) Being with Babies: understanding and responding to the infants in your
care. Beltsville, MD: Gryphon House.
Le Barbera, J.D., Izard, C.E., Vietze, P. & Parisi, S.A. (1976) Four and Six-Month-Old Infants Visual
Responses to Joy, Anger, and Neutral Expressions, Child Development, 47(2), 535-538.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1128816
LeCanuet, J.P., Fifer, W.P., Krasnegor, N.A. & Smotherman, W.P. (1995) Fetal Development: a psychobiological
perspective. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Lewis, M., Kagan, J. & Lalafat, J. (1966) Patterns of Fixation in Infants, Child Development, 37(2), 332-341.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1126807
Lim, B. (2004) Aesthetic Discourses in Early Childhood Settings: Dewey, Steiner, and Vygotsky, Early
Childhood Development and Care, 174(5), 473-486. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0300443032000153633
Linn, S. (2008) The Case for Make Believe: saving play in a commercialized world. New York: The New Press.
Maurer, D. & Barrera, M. (1981) Infants Perception of Natural and Distorted Arrangements of a Schematic
Face, Child Development, 52(1), 196-202. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/1129230
McDonnell, P.M. (1975) The Development of Visually Guided Reaching, Perception and Psychophysics, 18(3),
181-185.
McKenzie, B. & Day, R. (1987) Perceptual Development in Early Infancy: problems and issues. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Mirzoeff, N. (1999) An Introduction to Visual Culture. London: Routledge.
Mondloch, C.J., Lewis, T.L., Budreau, D.R., Maurer, D., Dannemiller, J.L., Stephens, B.R. & KleinerGathercoal, K.A. (1999) Face Perception during Infancy, Psychological Science, 10(5), 419-422.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00179
Pamelee, A.H. & Sigman, M. (1976) Development of Visual Behavior and Neurological Organization in Preterm and Full-term Infants, in A. Pick (Ed.) Minnesota Symposia on Child Psychology, vol. 10. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
Piscitelli, B. & Smith, B. (2009) Infants, Toddlers and Contemporary Art: bright and shiny research findings.
Paper presented at Third Art in Early Childhood Conference, Singapore, 4-6 June.
Quinn, P., Slater, A.M., Lee, K., Gibson, A., Smith, M., Ge, L. & Pascalis, O. (2005) Preferences for Attractive
Faces in Human Infants Extends beyond Conspecifics, Developmental Science, 11(1), 76-83.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00647.x
Read, M. & Upington, D. (2009) Young Childrens Color Preferences in the Interior Environment, Early
Childhood Education, 36(6), 491-495. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0311-6
Rideout, V. & Hamel, E. (2006) The Media Family: electronic media in the lives of infants, toddlers, preschoolers and
their parents. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.
Salapatek, P. & Cohen, L. (Eds) (1987) Handbook of Infant Perception, vol. 1. New York: Academic Press.
Schiller, P. (1998) The Thinking Brain, Child Care Information Exchange, 5(1), 49-52.
Simeon, F., Valenza, E., Umilta, C. & Barba, B. (1998) Preferential Orienting to Faces in Newborns: a
temporal-nasal asymmetry, Journal of Experimental Psychology: human perception and preference, 24(5), 13991405.
Sinclair, J., Jacka, E. & Cunningham, S. (2004) Peripheral Vision, in F. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds) The
Globalization Reader. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Sklair, L. (2004) Sociology of the Global System, in F. Lechner & J. Boli (Eds) The Globalization Reader.
Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Slater, A., Schulenburg, C. von der, Brown, E. & Badenoch, M. (1998) Newborn Infants Prefer Attractive
Faces, Infant Behavior and Development, 21(2), 345-354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(98)90011-X
Sturken, M. & Cartwright, L. (2001) Practices of Looking: an introduction to visual culture. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Tavin, K. (2003) Wrestling with Angels, Searching for Ghosts: toward a critical pedagogy of visual culture,
Studies in Art Education, 44(3) 197-213.
Tavin, K. (2005) Hantological Shifts: fear and lost things of popular (visual) culture, Studies in Art Education,
46(2), 101-117.
Teller, D.Y. (1979) The Forced-Choice Preferential Looking Procedure: a psychophysical technique for use
with human infants, Infant Behavior and Development, 2(1), 135-153.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(79)80016-8
386

Tinmannsvik, L. & Bjelland, H. (2009) Children and Aesthetics: exploring toddler aesthetic experience of
everyday products, International Journal of Product Development, 9(4), 370-388.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJPD.2009.027471
Trevarthen, C. (1997) Fetal and Neonatal Psychology: intrinsic motives and learning behavior, in
F. Cockburn (Ed.) Advances in Perinatal Medicine. New York: Parthenon.
Valenza, E., Simion, F., Cassia, V. & Umilt, C. (1996) Face Preference at Birth, Journal of Experimental
Psychology, 22(4), 892-903.
Wilson, B. (2003) Of Diagrams and Rhizomes: visual culture, contemporary art, and the impossibility of
mapping the content of art education, Studies in Art Education, 44(3), 214-229.
Wright, S. (2003) Children, Meaning-Making and the Arts. Frenchs Forest: Pearson Education Australia.
Yonas, A. & Owsley, C. (1987) Development of Visual Space Perception, in P. Salapatek & L. Cohen (Eds)
Handbook of Infant Perception: from perception to cognition, vol. 2. New York: Academic Press.
Zemach, I.K. & Teller, D.Y. (2007) Infant Color Vision: infants spontaneous color preferences are well
behaved, Vision Research, 47(10), 1362-1367. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2007.02.002
Zimmerman, F.J., Christakis, D.A. & Meltzoff, A.N. (2007) Television and DVD/Video Viewing in Children
Younger Than 2 Years, Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, 161(5), 473-479.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1001/archpedi.161.5.473
Zusne, L. (1970) Visual Perception of Form. New York: Academic Press.
KATHERINA DANKO-MCGHEE is Professor in Art Education and serves as the Early Childhood
Art Education Coordinator at the University of Toledo, USA. She oversees and also teaches the
methods course Art for the Pre- and Primary Child, and coordinates the annual Childrens Art
Workshop and Art Exhibition. Her research interests are the aesthetic preferences of young
children, the environment as third teacher, and museum experiences for young children.
Correspondence: Katherina Danko-McGhee, Early Childhood Art Education Coordinator,
Department of Art, University of Toledo, 620 Grove Place, Toledo, OH 43620, USA
(kdankom@pop3.utoledo.edu).
387

The Aesthetic Preferences of Infants: Pictures of Faces That Captivate Their Interest

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Título original

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

The Aesthetic Preferences of Infants: Pictures of Faces That Captivate Their Interest

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood

Volume 11 Number 4 2010

The Aesthetic Preferences of Infants:

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

*significant at .05 level.

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

*significant at .05 level.

*significant at 0.05 level.

Cross-cultural Differences and Similarities

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

The Impact of Watching Television on the Aesthetic Preferences for Faces

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Aesthetic Preferences of Infants

Você também pode gostar