RESEARCH ARTICLE

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants
Emerges Earlier for Adult-Directed SpeechAnne-Raphaëlle Richoz1,2,3, Paul C. Quinn4, Anne Hillairet de Boisferon2,3,Carole Berger2,3, Hélène Loevenbruck2,3, David J. Lewkowicz5, Kang Lee6,
Marjorie Dole2,3, Roberto Caldara1, Olivier Pascalis2,3*

a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111

1 Eye and Brain Mapping Laboratory (iBMLab), Department of Psychology, University of Fribourg, Fribourg,
Switzerland, 2 LPNC, University of Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France, 3 LPNC, CNRS-UMR 5105,
University of Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France, 4 Department of Psychological and Brain Sciences,
University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware, United States of America, 5 Department of Communication
Sciences & Disorders, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of America, 6 Instituteof Child Study University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada* olivier.pascalis@univ-grenoble-alpes.fr

Abstract
OPEN ACCESS
Citation: Richoz A-R, Quinn PC, Hillairet deBoisferon A, Berger C, Loevenbruck H, Lewkowicz
DJ, et al. (2017) Audio-Visual Perception of Genderby Infants Emerges Earlier for Adult-Directed
Speech. PLoS ONE 12(1): e0169325. doi:10.1371/
journal.pone.0169325
Editor: Alexandra Key, Vanderbilt University,
UNITED STATES
Received: September 15, 2016
Accepted: December 15, 2016
Published: January 6, 2017
Copyright: © 2017 Richoz et al. This is an open
access article distributed under the terms of theCreative Commons Attribution License, which
permits unrestricted use, distribution, andreproduction in any medium, provided the original
author and source are credited.

Early multisensory perceptual experiences shape the abilities of infants to perform sociallyrelevant visual categorization, such as the extraction of gender, age, and emotion fromfaces. Here, we investigated whether multisensory perception of gender is influenced byinfant-directed (IDS) or adult-directed (ADS) speech. Six-, 9-, and 12-month-old infants saw
side-by-side silent video-clips of talking faces (a male and a female) and heard either asoundtrack of a female or a male voice telling a story in IDS or ADS. Infants participated inonly one condition, either IDS or ADS. Consistent with earlier work, infants displayed advantages in matching female relative to male faces and voices. Moreover, the new finding thatemerged in the current study was that extraction of gender from face and voice was stronger
at 6 months with ADS than with IDS, whereas at 9 and 12 months, matching did not differ
for IDS versus ADS. The results indicate that the ability to perceive gender in audiovisual
speech is influenced by speech manner. Our data suggest that infants may extract multisensory gender information developmentally earlier when looking at adults engaged in conversation with other adults (i.e., ADS) than when adults are directly talking to them (i.e., IDS).
Overall, our findings imply that the circumstances of social interaction may shape early multisensory abilities to perceive gender.

Data Availability Statement: All relevant data arewithin the paper and its Supporting Information
files.
Funding: This research was supported by grant
R01 HD-46526 from the National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development (P.Q., O.P., K.L.).
This research was also supported by grant F14/06
from the Rectors’ Conference of Swiss Universities(CRUS) (A.R.R.).
Competing Interests: The authors have declaredthat no competing interests exist.

Introduction
Human faces provide multisensory inputs to infants, exposing them not only to visual information but also to the voice and language of their caregivers. This perceptual experience
shapes early multisensory abilities that are critical for the development of social categories
related to vocalizing and talking human faces.
One social category to which infants have extensive exposure is gender. The ability ofhumans to process male and female faces has been widely studied over the last two decades

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 2017

1 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants(e.g., [1, 2]). Adults reliably and rapidly identify facial gender, even when relying only on individual facial features, such as eyebrows, jaw, chin, or mouth [1–3]. In infants, the ability to categorize face gender develops between three months and one year of age (e.g., [4, 5–8]). Even
though some research suggests that infants form categories for both female and male faces [5–8], other studies point to a developmental asymmetry in the acquisition of gender categories:
when infants are presented with a category of male faces, they subsequently prefer female overnovel male faces, but when infants are presented with a category of female faces, they do not
subsequently prefer male over novel female faces [7]. The asymmetry has been further shown
to reflect a spontaneous preference for female over male faces when the primary caregiver isfemale (e.g., [9, 10], for a review, see [11]). These studies also suggest that infants develop morestructured representations for female faces than for male faces. The processing advantages forfemale over male faces are in turn believed to reflect experiential differences between female
and male faces. Infants reared by a female primary caregiver experience over 70% female faces
and less than 30% male faces in the first months of life [9, 12, 13].
Even though gender processing is mainly based on visual properties of the face, vocal cuesalso play an important role. Adults perceive faces and voices as coherent entities (e.g., [14, 15])
and face-voice associations can be the basis for gender identification, e.g., long hair and thinand softly curved eyebrows associated with high-pitched voice [16]. Although infants perceive
audiovisual coherence of speech syllables as early as 2 to 4 months of age [17–19], their ability
to use audio-visual correspondences to respond to gender emerges in the second half of the firstyear of life, and consistent with the work on visual categories, is restricted to female faces [20,21]. For example, the work of Walker-Andrews et al. [22] has revealed that 6 month-old infants
were able to reliably match synchronous faces and voices when presented with gender information. However, to ensure perfect synchrony between faces and voices, Walker-Andrews et al.
[22] asked each actor to dub their voice onto the video-recordings of their own face. This procedure made it difficult to tease apart whether infants genuinely matched faces and voices based on
gender information or whether they made the match based on idiosyncratic relations between
faces and voices. This latter possibility is supported by a more recent study demonstrating that
6-month-old infants are able to link idiosyncratic cross-modal identity cues of unfamiliar persons [23]. Subsequent studies have reported that the emergence of audio-visual perception ofgender can vary from 6 months to 8 months to even later (for a review, see [11], [19–22, 24]).
The specific timing of the emergence of the ability to perceive the multisensory coherence of gender might depend on the different types of visual and auditory stimuli used
across the different studies and the methodology of the tasks [11]. Some studies investigating perception of multisensory gender coherence have presented dynamic faces [19, 20, 22],
whereas others have relied on static images [21]. Use of dynamic faces provides a more ecologically valid approach to investigate multisensory perception of gender, as our naturalenvironment is surrounded with dynamic multisensory cues [25]. Dynamic facial cues also
seem to play a critical role in the way faces are encoded [26] and recognized [27]. Moreover,dynamic representations of faces seem to influence facial scanning, prompting infants toshift their fixations to different facial features [26]. Multiple fixation shifts on major facial
areas are likely to benefit gender processing given that the visual cues for gender can befound throughout the face [1–3]. The auditory stimuli used to investigate multisensory perception of gender have also varied across different studies. Some studies have presented isolated vowels [19], whereas others have played recordings of fluent and continuous speech[21, 22, 24]. The latter may facilitate the detection of the gender of the speaker via additionalcues such as intonation, stress, duration, respiratory patterns, and vocal breathiness [28,29].

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20172 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

It is additionally possible that the manner of speech (infant- or adult-directed) influences
the perception of multisensory gender coherence. In daily life, parents or siblings interact with
infants using infant-directed speech (IDS), varying at both prosodic and linguistic levels [30].
Infants are particularly sensitive to prosody [31–33] and largely prefer IDS to adult-directedspeech (ADS) [30]. IDS is characterized by better articulation, higher pitch, slower rhythm,
many breaks, and the use of special words (e.g., [30, 34, 35]).
Several studies have shown that the manner of speech has an influence on the cognitive [36]and social development of infants [37] with IDS promoting, for example, language acquisition,
inclusive of word segmentation and lexical comprehension (e.g., [38, 39, 40]). Based on thisprior evidence, it could be reasoned that IDS might also facilitate the extraction of gender
information from face and voice. However, even though IDS facilitates lexical learning andword segmentation (e.g., [38, 40]), its facilitating role in perceiving multisensory gender coherence might be minimal or non-existent. Indeed, the high pitch of IDS, which brings malevoices closer to the daily frequencies of female voices, might even impede the ability of infants
to perceive multisensory gender coherence. Consistent with this suggestion, Trainor and Desjardins [41] demonstrated that the high pitch of IDS negatively affected vowel discriminationin 6- to 7-month-old infants. The authors concluded that rather than being a facilitator ofvowel learning, the primary role of high pitch in IDS is to attract attention and communicate
intention and emotion.
Using dynamic stimuli and exaggerated prosodic nursery rhymes characteristic of IDS, Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20] recently investigated the developmental emergence of the ability
to perceive the coherence of auditory and visual attributes of gender in 6- and 9-month-old
infants. Infants viewed two side-by-side video clips of a man and a woman reciting a nursery
rhyme and heard a synchronous male or female soundtrack. Infants did not associate audible
and visible gender attributes until the age of 9 months, and only for female faces. The authorsinterpreted these findings as evidence that a combination of different factors (e.g., stimulus
and task complexity, and amount of perceptual experience) influence the multisensory responsiveness of infants.
Because Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20] only investigated IDS and not ADS, we conducted
a new study to clarify whether and how the manner of speech may influence the perception ofmultisensory gender coherence. The experiment consisted of four 12-s trials, during whichinfants saw two side-by-side silent video-clips of actors (a male and a female) reciting a nursery
rhyme; they were the same video-clips used by Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20]. A soundtrackwith a female or a male voice telling a story in IDS or ADS was played at the same time. Infants
participated in only one condition, either IDS or ADS, and heard a male voice on half of thetrials and a female voice on the other half of the trials. If the infants could detect the gender of
the audio-visual correspondence, we expected them to look longer at the face whose gendermatched the gender of the accompanying voice than at the face that did not match it. We
decided to use dynamic video recordings rather than static faces because dynamic stimuli provide observers with richer and ecologically more valid representations of the sorts of events
that infants experience in their daily lives (e.g., [25, 42, 43]).
We reasoned that if IDS affects the extraction of gender from face and voice in the same
way that it affects word segmentation and lexical comprehension, then the perception of multisensory gender coherence would emerge earlier with IDS than with ADS. However, if IDS
draws attentional resources to the prosodic features and the linguistic content of the speechrather than to the gender of the talking face [20], then the perception of multisensory gendercoherence might emerge later with IDS than with ADS. Moreover, the high-pitched intonation
characteristic of IDS might bring male voices closer to the usual daily life frequencies of female

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20173 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

ADS, which might make it more difficult for infants to match an IDS utterance to either amale or female face.
An additional expectation was that the perception of multisensory gender coherence might
be specific to female faces. This prediction is supported by results from previous intersensory
matching studies [20, 21], and findings that infants exhibit a spontaneous preference forfemale over male faces [9, 10], as well as findings that infants possess a more advanced category
representation for female than male faces [10, 11].

Materials and Method
Participants
6-month-olds (11 females) (Mage = 195 days, SD = 4 days), 9-month-olds (12 females) (Mage =283 days, SD = 5 days), and 12-month-olds (13 females) (Mage = 379 days, SD = 6 days) were
included in the analyses (n = 31 per age category). Infants were healthy, full-term participants,
recruited from the maternity of the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire of Grenoble in France.
They were all Caucasians and living in a French speaking environment. Eighteen additional
infants were tested, but excluded from the analyses because they did not complete the procedure due to crying (n = 6) or fussiness (n = 12).

Stimuli
We used the same visual stimuli as those used by Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20], although we
did not use the soundtracks presented in that study. Instead, we presented new soundtracks thatare described below. The video recordings consisted of six Caucasian adult faces (3 females)
reciting a nursery rhyme in French while maintaining a neutral facial expression. During thevideo recordings, actors were asked to look directly at the video camera and to recite at thesame tempo as a model whose video was played as a template before the recordings. The videos
in each pair were edited to ensure that they started with the same opening of the mouth [20].
The faces were recorded against a green background and neither of the actors wore gender-specific visual information, such as makeup or jewelry. The faces subtended a visual angle of 19.09˚(vertical) and 14.32˚ (horizontal).
As in previous studies (e.g., [19, 20]), two adults (1 male) who were different from thoseseen in the videos were selected to record the soundtracks. The content of the soundtracks differed from the nursery rhyme told by the actors in the videos (i.e., the speech did not correspond with the articulatory motions of the actors). This was done to ensure that infants were
genuinely representing gender across face and voice (i.e., extracting the amodal invariance ofgender per se) and not simply responding to the co-occurrence of the two streams of information or making the match based on speaker idiosyncrasies in visible and audible articulatory or
respiratory patterns. We registered the audio-recordings with a high-quality audio microphone in a special soundproof recording room. We asked the two speakers to provide four
recordings: each of two stories was recorded in both ADS and IDS. The short “stories” (each a
12-s long utterance) were as follows:
Story 1: “Moi je trouve que c’est une belle journée aujourd’hui. Je vois le soleil qui brille.
C’est vraiment super que tu sois venu me voir”.
(English translation: “It’s a beautiful day today. I see the sun shining. It’s really nice that you
came to see me.”)
Story 2: “Tu es venu de loin pour me voir aujourd’hui. C’est vraiment super de t’avoir rencontré. J’espère que c’est le cas aussi pour toi. Je trouve que tu es un très beau bébé.”(English translation: “You came from far away to see me today. It’s really nice to meet you.
I hope it is also the case for you. You are a beautiful baby.”)

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20174 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

Table 1. Fundamental Frequency Characteristics in Hertz (Hz). Average pitch level, pitch minimum, pitch maximum, and pitch span of the fundamental
frequencies (Hz) of the ADS and IDS male and female voices.
Voice

Condition

Pitch level (Hz)Pitch min (Hz)Pitch max (Hz)Pitch span (Hz)

FemaleIDS

255.27158.20502.48344.28

Male

IDS

166.43102.86289.98187.12

FemaleADS

210.69158.40338.74180.34

Male

ADS

116.4787.71

178.1990.47

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325.t001

The semantic content of both stories was very similar. In order to have 12-s length stories,
the second story included four sentences instead of three as in the first story. The number ofwords in each sentence was, however, similar. Twenty French-speaking adults were asked tocategorize the stories as adult or infant-directed. Results revealed strong agreement between
observers as indicated by the Fleiss’ kappa of 0.73.
The utterances were acoustically analyzed using Praat [44]. Pitch level was computed as themean of the fundamental frequency (f0) values for each utterance as a whole. Pitch span wascomputed by subtracting the minimum from the maximum f0 value for each utterance as afurther index of pitch variation. The acoustic analyses of the voices heard by the infants in ourstudy revealed the following fundamental frequencies: For IDS, the male voice varied between
102 and 289 Hz and the female voice varied between 158 and 502 Hz. For ADS, these fundamental frequencies ranged between 87 and 178 Hz for the male voice and between 158 and338 Hz for the female voice. When converted to semitones (st), the difference between the
maximum f0 value for the male voice in IDS and the maximum for the female voice in ADS
was less than 3 st. The average values for the female and male IDS and ADS voices are reported
in Table 1 in Hertz and Table 2 in semitones (relative to 100 Hz).

Apparatus and Procedure
Infants were seated on the lap of a parent in a dimly illuminated room, 60 cm away from a
22-inch computer screen. Parents were asked not to intervene, interact, or speak with theirinfant during the experiment. All parents signed a written consent form for their infant prior
to the experiment. The Ethical Committee of the Centres d’Investigation Clinique de l’interrégion Rhône-Alpes-Auvergne (authorization number IRB 2010–21) approved the study
reported here.
The experiment consisted of four 12-s trials for each condition (i.e., IDS or ADS) with two
different sets of faces and corresponding soundtracks. Infants participated in only one condition, either IDS or ADS. We divided the infants of each age category into two groups (n = 15
or 16 participants per group). On each trial, infants were presented with two side-by-side silent
video-clips of faces (one male and one female) reciting a nursery rhyme. The faces were separated by a 15-cm gap. We used the same video-clips on Trials 1 and 3, and on Trials 2 and 4,
but with switched left-right locations of the faces, so that each face was seen on the right andTable 2. Fundamental Frequency Characteristics in Semitones (st). Average pitch level, pitch minimum, pitch maximum, and pitch span of the semitones(st) of the ADS and IDS male and female voices.
Voice

Condition

Pitch level (st)Pitch min (st)Pitch max (st)Pitch span (st)Female

IDS

15.79

7.87

27.95

20.07

Male

IDS

8.23

0.48

18.41

17.93

Female

ADS

12.70

7.95

21.13

13.17

Male

ADS

2.41

-2.26

9.92

12.18

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325.t002

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 2017

5 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

Fig 1. Schematic representation of the procedure. Infants saw two side-by-side silent video-clips
presenting a male and a female face reciting a nursery rhyme. A soundtrack with a female or a male voice
telling a story in IDS or ADS was played at the same time. The video-clips were repeated twice throughout thefour trials, with left-right reversal for the positioning of the faces. (The individuals in this figure have given
written informed consent (as outlined in PLOS consent form) to publish their pictures.)doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325.g001

the left side of the screen (Fig 1). The side of gender presentation (male or female) was counterbalanced across infants on the first trial and reversed on the following trials (on Trials 3 and4, see Fig 1). A soundtrack with a female or a male voice telling a story either in IDS or ADS
was played at the same time as the video-clips. On each trial, infants listened to either a maleor female voice, with the woman’s voice presented twice over the four trials (i.e., for a given
infant, across trials, the two female-male face pairings were presented once with a female voice
and once with a male voice).
We used the E-prime 2.0 software (Psychology Software Tools, Pittsburgh, PA, USA) to
conduct the experiment. Two loudspeakers (Dell A225) placed behind the screen, halfway
between the two faces, transmitted the audio stimuli. A low-light video camera, located above
the stimulus-presentation monitor, was used to record infant looking behavior. The video
recordings were subsequently digitized and analyzed with a frame-by-frame coding procedure.
We used a preferential looking technique to test multisensory gender perception of faces andvoices and measured the total duration of looking time directed to each face.

Results
We performed analyses on the mean proportion of total looking time (PTLT) that each infant
directed at the matching faces over the four test trials. For this calculation, we divided theamount of looking at the matching face by the total amount of looking at both faces during
each trial and then averaged the two proportions for each gender over the four test trials (datain S1 File). If infants perceived multisensory gender coherence, then they should direct more
looking time to the face that matched the heard voice. The data were collapsed over story number (1 vs. 2) because it did not affect looking behavior, F(1, 91) = .26, p = .60, η2 p = .003. Preliminary analysis of participant gender revealed no significant main effect or interaction of thisPLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20176 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

factor, F(1, 91) = 2.52, p = .13, η2 p = .02. This factor was therefore not included in the subsequent analyses.
A three-way mixed ANOVA was first conducted on the PTLTs directed at the matching facewith condition (IDS, ADS) and age (6-, 9-, 12-months) as between-subjects factors and genderof the voice (male, female) as a within-subjects factor. Results first revealed that gender of thevoice affected infant responsiveness, F(1,87) = 9.82, p < .005, η2 p = .10. As expected, infants
looked longer at the matching face in the presence of a female (M = 56.30%, SD = 10.99%) thana male voice (M = 51.26%, SD = 10.93%). A one-sample t-test against the chance value of 50%
revealed that the PTLTs directed at the female matching faces were significantly different fromchance, t(92) = 5.52, p < .001 (two-tailed), Cohen’s d = .57. This was not the case for the PTLTs
directed at the male matching faces, t(92) = 1.11, p = .27, Cohen’s d = .11.
Results further showed that condition (IDS vs. ADS) affected responsiveness, F(1, 87) =6.33, p < .05, η2 p = .06, reflecting the fact that the PTLTs directed at the face that matched theheard voice were higher in the ADS (M = 55.73%, SD = 7.80%) than IDS condition (M = 51.86%,
SD = 7.51%). There was also a statistically significant two-way interaction between condition andage, F(2, 87) = 3.73, p < .05, η2 p = .07, indicating that the total amount of time spent on the facethat matched the heard voice was not the same for the three age groups in each condition (Fig 2).
Post-hoc t-tests revealed that this effect was driven by the 6-months-olds who gazed significantly
longer at the matching face in the ADS (M = 57.32%, SD = 9.98%) than in the IDS condition(M = 48.06%, SD = 8.40%), t(29) = 2.80, p < .05, Cohen’s d = .51. For this age group, one-sample
t-tests against the chance value of 50% revealed that the PTLTs directed at the face that matched
the heard voice were significantly different from chance in the ADS condition, t(14) = 2.84, p <.05, Cohen’s d = .75, but not in the IDS condition, t(15) = —.92, p = .37, Cohen’s d = —.23. In
9-month-olds, no differences were found between the IDS and ADS condition, t(29) = .45, p =.65, Cohen’s d = .08. In this age group, the PTLTs directed at the face that matched the heard
voice were different from the chance value of 50%, t(30) = 3.20, p < .005, Cohen’s d = .58. The
same pattern of results was found for 12-month-olds, showing no differences between both conditions, t(29) = -1.54, p = .13, Cohen’s d = —.28, but a statistically significant difference from thechance value of 50% for the PTLTs directed at the matching face, t(30) = 4.42, p < .001, Cohen’sd = .80. The three-way interaction between condition, gender of the voice, and age was not statistically significant, F(2, 87) = .19, p = .82, η2 p = .004.

Fig 2. Mean proportion of total looking time to the face that matched the heard voice in eachcondition (IDS, ADS) and for each age group (6-, 9-, 12-month-olds). Note: *p < .05; Error bars represent
SDs.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325.g002

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20177 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

Discussion
The aim of the present study was to investigate whether infant- (IDS) or adult-directed (ADS)
speech influences the perception of multisensory gender coherence. There were two possibilities. Given the facilitative effects of IDS observed for language acquisition, it might be the casethat IDS could facilitate the extraction of gender from face and voice. However, as a language
facilitator, it is also possible that IDS draws attentional resources to the prosodic features andthe linguistic content of speech rather than to the gender of a talking face [20]. Based on thispossibility and on the idea that the higher pitch in IDS is likely to reduce gender differences inthe voices of speakers, one might observe a later emergence of multisensory perception of gender with IDS than with ADS. Our data are consistent with the latter possibility. Infants gazedlonger at the face that matched the heard voice in the ADS than in the IDS condition. Furthermore, our results showed a significant interaction between age and condition (ADS, IDS)
reflecting the fact that the time spent by each age group on the face that matched the heard
voice was not the same in each condition. At 6 months, infants were more likely to match gender across face and voice with ADS than with IDS. At the two older age groups, there was nodifference in matching performance between ADS and IDS.
An additional expectation was that the perception of multisensory gender coherence might
be specific to female faces. Our findings supported this prediction as they revealed that thegender of the voice affected infant responsiveness. Infants displayed advantages in matching
female relative to male faces and voices.
On the one hand, our findings that the perception of multisensory gender coherence emerges
between 6 and 9 months of age when associated with IDS are in line with previous studies. For
example, Patterson and Werker [19] found that 8-month-old infants were able to match faces
and voices when presented with infant-directed vowels. Similarly, Hillairet de Boisferon et al.
[20] previously demonstrated that the perception of multisensory gender coherence emerges
between 6 and 9 months of age when infants were exposed to faces reciting a nursery rhyme. On
the other hand, our findings differ somewhat from the findings reported by Walker-Andrews
et al. [22] who reported successful matching of auditory and visible attributes of gender by 6months of age when infants were presented with infant-directed nursery rhymes. The earlier
emergence of matching observed by Walker-Andrews et al. [22] may be due to the fact that thevoices heard by the infants were the actual voices of the two speakers presented in the videos,raising the possibility that idiosyncratic relations between faces and voices might have facilitatedmatching. Prosodic bits of information, such as acoustic parameters, intensity, lip motion, andjaw movement are known to differ across individuals (e.g., [45, 46, 47]) as is the pronunciationof segmental and suprasegmental information (e.g., [48, 49]). Given that the actors in WalkerAndrews et al. [22] were asked to dub their voice onto their own video recordings to ensure perfect synchrony, the possibility that they produced idiosyncratic articulatory or respiratory patterns which facilitated auditory and visual gender matching cannot be ruled out.
To control for possible idiosyncratic intersensory relations, speaker identity cues, or individually-specific respiratory patterns, we selected different voices that belonged to none of theactors presented in the video recordings. In this way, and as in previous studies [19, 20], we
ensured that infants were genuinely representing gender across face and voice. Also, the auditory and visual information differed in that the auditory information was a different utterance
than the one told by the actors in the videos. We chose these types of stimulus materials so toensure that the common information across the auditory and visual modalities was gender. It
is additionally worth noting that in the Walker-Andrews et al. [22] procedure, infants saw only
one pair of female and male faces. In contrast, in our study as well as in previous ones [20, 21,24], infants were exposed to two pairs of female and male faces. As different identities were

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20178 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

included rather than only one prototypical exemplar of a specific category (e.g., long-haired
blond woman with blue eyes), which probably facilitated specific matching, our procedure
more likely tested more general infant perception of multisensory gender coherence.
There are several differences between IDS and ADS that may contribute to the developmentally earlier matching of audible and visible cues in infants listening to ADS. Substantial evidence has shown that IDS influences the cognitive development of infants, promoting
language acquisition, inclusive of lexical comprehension [40], word recognition [39], and segmentation in a sentence (e.g., [38, 40]). As noted, these characteristics might suggest that IDS
should facilitate infant perception of multisensory gender coherence. However, IDS may not
facilitate all aspects of language acquisition. For example, Trainor and Desjardins [41] reported
that the high pitch typical of IDS impaired vowel discrimination in 6- to 7-month-olds, becauseof acoustic parameters and the space between harmonics in high-pitched sounds [41]. Moreover,when using exaggerated infant-directed nursery rhymes, Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20] recently
demonstrated that infants did not match audible and visible attributes of gender until the age of
9 months, and only for female faces. As observed by Hillairet de Boisferon et al. [20], a combination of various factors, including attentional resources, and stimulus and task complexity, might
account for the later age estimate of emergence for multisensory gender coherence. IDS is characterized by slower tempo, shorter utterances, longer pauses, better articulation, as well as higher
pitch (e.g., [50, 51–53]). Critically, the typically higher pitch of IDS [54–56] may affect the perception of multisensory gender coherence in infants. The usual fundamental frequency of a malevoice varies between 90 and 140 Hz and that of a female voice between 170 and 290 Hz for ADS[57]. For IDS, this fundamental frequency can range from 120 to 190 Hz for male voices andfrom 250 to 450 Hz for female voices [57]. The acoustic analyses of the particular voices heard by
the infants in our study revealed similar fundamental frequencies for ADS and IDS (see Table 1).
The higher pitch in IDS thus brings male voices closer to the usual daily life frequencies of female
ADS, which might create a possible basis for why younger infants have more difficulty matchinggender when presented with an IDS utterance corresponding to either the male or female face.
Compared to ADS, IDS has also been argued to be effective for attracting and holding
infant attention (e.g., [55, 58]). It has been associated with higher social responsiveness as compared to ADS [59]. Again, one might expect that increased attention would lead to stronger
perception of multisensory gender coherence in infants. However, as IDS also promotes learning (e.g., [60, 61, 62]) and language acquisition (e.g., [40, 63, 64]), one can speculate that
greater attentional resources are allocated to the meaning of the speech, to the extraction ofsegmental and suprasegmental information [48], and to the acquisition of new words, rather
than to the gender of the face. Our results might therefore suggest that with IDS, the attentionof younger infants is driven away from the gender of the talking face and towards the linguistic
content of the speech. Further studies using, for example, eye-tracking would be necessary toverify this suggestion. Whatever findings such future work might yield, a potential implicationof the difference in findings with ADS versus IDS is that younger infants may not be able toextract multisensory gender information when adults are directly talking to them (as is typicalwith IDS), and are more likely to do so when looking at adults engaged in conversation, using
ADS with one another. Another implication would be that when addressed with IDS, younger
infants may be able to extract multisensory gender information, but only when provided withadditional facilitative cues such as articulatory patterns or body-related information. This latter
implication is in accord with the study of Walker-Andrews et al. [22], showing that from 6
months of age, infants are able to match faces and voices when presented with synchronous
speech. Different from the Walker-Andrews et al. study, idiosyncratic cues or physical information such as gender-related clothing or make-up, were not available in our study.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 20179 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

Finally, Schachner and Hannon [37] have shown that IDS conveys cues for social selection,
guiding the preferences of 5-month-olds towards potential partners. After hearing an individual speak in IDS, infants attend more to that individual than to a novel person. This social preference is not found in the situation where an individual speaks in ADS [37]. An adult using
IDS transmits affective components that may relate to safety [65, 66]. Interestingly, Kim andJohnson [67] recently reported that infant preference for infant-directedness is not only
restricted to speech but also extends to ID faces and that this preference might be mediated by
the emotion conveyed by the face [32]. Based on these findings, our results suggest that theattention of younger infants is directed to IDS cues related to learning, emotion, and safety,
rather than to the gender of the talking face.
It is additionally worth noting that we did not observe any differences between IDS andADS conditions for 9- and 12-month-old infants. Correspondingly, Newman and Hussain[68] found a decrease in infant preference for IDS over ADS during the second half of the firstyear of life, with no preference observed at the age of 9 months. This latter outcome is inaccord with the finding that only younger infants in the present study were affected by speechmanner. It may be that IDS engages the attention of younger infants to the extent that it interferes with processing of other attributes of the interaction including the gender of the speaker’s
face and voice.
Like in previous studies [20, 21, 24], our results reveal an asymmetrical responsiveness tofemale versus male faces and voices. Infants looked longer to female faces in the presence of afemale voice, but not longer to male faces in the presence of a male voice. The most likely
explanation for this result is that infants typically have predominant experience with female
faces (e.g., [12, 13, 69]). Even though infants are from birth able to match individual voice
characteristics with particular faces [70, 71], and perceive multisensory coherence of visible
and audible speech syllables from 2 to 4 months of age [17–19], our results provide further evidence that it is not until the middle of the first year of life that they acquire the necessary skills
to perceive more complex attributes such as gender. It may be that increased experience isneeded before multisensory coherence emerges for such attributes [20, 24, 72].
More extensive experience with women may lead to an earlier emergence of the category
knowledge of female faces because infants are exposed to multiple exemplars of the relevant
attributes for categorization, e.g., long hair, thin and soft curved eyebrows, rounded cheeks,longer eye-to-eyebrow distance, and high-pitched voice [73]. Complex categorization skills
seem to be therefore highly dependent on the degree of perceptual experience, inclusive of
daily life experiences with relevant exemplars of a category. The association between malefaces and voices would similarly require learning of particular correlations, e.g., deeper voicewith prominent Adam’s apple [74]. These associations may be more difficult to acquire
because infants typically spend less time with male as compared to female faces during the firstyear of life [12]. Poulin-Dubois et al. [24] found that it was not until the age of 18 months that
infants were able to perceive multisensory gender coherence for male faces and voices. Given
that Poulin-Dubois et al. [24] used static images in their study, it would be informative to clarify whether the perception of multisensory gender coherence for male faces and voices also
emerges around 18 months of age with dynamic faces. Future research could also investigate
whether infants raised with fathers as primary caregivers would exhibit the opposite pattern ofasymmetrical responsiveness to male versus female faces and voices. This possibility is raisedby the Quinn et al. [10] findings showing that infants raised primarily by male caregivers
attend more to male faces than to female ones, suggesting that daily experience with a particular gender affects face processing.
Finally, the finding that infants only matched the gender of female faces and voices does
not seem to reveal an overall preference for female faces, but rather a true matching of audible

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201710 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infantsand visible gender attributes. If there were an overall preference for female faces, 6-month-old
infants should also have looked longer to female faces in the IDS condition. Interestingly, Liuet al. [9] recently demonstrated a preference for female own-race faces in 3- and 6-month-old
infants, but no such gender preference in 9-month-olds, suggesting a decrease in the female
face preference in older infants. The results of Liu et al. [9] were taken as evidence that by 9months of age, male face experience has accumulated to the point where there is no longer apreference for female faces. That reasoning would suggest that 12-month-olds would also
show no baseline preference, an observation that would need to be confirmed with additional
evidence.

Conclusions
The present study used dynamic face representations coupled with infant- or adult-directedspeech to test multisensory gender perception in 6-, 9- and 12-month-old infants. The results
revealed that by the middle of the first year of life, infants are able to perceive multisensory
gender coherence for female faces and voices in the case of ADS. However, this ability emerges
later with IDS. Altogether these results indicate that the ability to efficiently perceive gender inaudiovisual speech is influenced by speech manner and emerges earlier for female faces. Ourdata imply that younger infants may be less likely to extract multisensory gender information
when adults are directly talking to them in IDS than when looking at adults engaged in ADS
with another. Overall, our findings imply that the circumstances of social interaction as well as
predominant experience with female faces and voices, shape early multisensory abilities to perceive gender.

Supporting Information
S1 File. Data. Proportion of total looking time (PTLT) that each infant directed at the matching and non-matching faces over the four test trials.
(CSV)

Acknowledgments
A special thanks goes to all the infants and their parents for their participation in this study, as
well as to all the people who helped for testing and coding the videos. This research was supported by grant R01 HD-46526 from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development as well as by grant F14/06 from the Rectors’ Conference of Swiss Universities (CRUS).

Author Contributions
Conceptualization: ARR OP RC.
Formal analysis: ARR PCQ AH OP RC DJL.
Funding acquisition: OP PCQ DJL KL ARR.
Investigation: MD CB ARR AH OP HL.
Methodology: ARR OP AH CB HL.
Project administration: OP.
Software: ARR CB HL OP.
Supervision: OP RC.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201711 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

Validation: OP.
Visualization: DJL PCQ ARR OP.
Writing – original draft: ARR.
Writing – review & editing: ARR OP PCQ RC DJL KL.

References
1.

Brown E, Perrett DI. What gives a face its gender? Perception. 1993; 22: 829–840. PMID: 8115240

2.

Bruce V, Burton AM, Hanna E, Healey P, Mason O, Coombes A, et al. Sex-discrimination—how do wetell the difference between male and female faces. Perception. 1993; 22: 131–152. PMID: 8474840

3.

O’Toole AJ, Deffenbacher KA, Valentin D, McKee K, Huff D, Abdi H. The perception of face gender:
The role of stimulus structure in recognition and classification. Memory and Cognition. 1998; 26: 146–
160. PMID: 9519705

4.

Cohen LB, Strauss MS. Concept acquisition in the human infant. Child Development. 1979; 50: 419–
424. PMID: 487881

5.

Cornell EH. Infant’s discrimination of photographs of faces following redundant presentations. Journalof Experimental Child Psychology. 1974; 18: 98–106.

6.

Fagan JF, Singer LT. The role of simple feature differences in infants’ recognition of faces. Infant
Behavior and Development. 1979; 2: 39–45. doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(79)80006-5 PMID: 25593377

7.

Leinbach MD, Fagot BI. Categorical habituation to male and female faces—gender schematic processing in Infancy. Infant Behavior and Development. 1993; 16: 317–332.

8.

Younger BA, Fearing DD. Parsing items into separate categories: Developmental change in infant categorization. Child Development. 1999; 70: 291–303.

9.

Liu S, Xiao NG, Quinn PC, Zhu D, Ge L, Pascalis O, et al. Asian infants show preference for own-race
but not other-race female faces: The role of infant caregiving arrangements. Frontiers in Psychology.
2015; 6: 593. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00593 PMID: 25999902

10.

Quinn PC, Yahr J, Kuhn A, Slater AM, Pascalis O. Representation of the gender of human faces byinfants: A preference for female. Perception. 2002; 31: 1109–1121. PMID: 12375875

11.

Ramsey JL, Langlois JH, Marti NC. Infant categorization of faces: Ladies first. Developmental Review.
2005; 25: 212–46.

12.

Rennels JL, Davis RE. Facial experience during the first year. Infant Behavior and Development. 2008;
31: 665–678. doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2008.04.009 PMID: 18554724

13.

Sugden NA, Mohamed-Ali MI, Moulson MC. I spy with my little eye: Typical, daily exposure to faces documented from a first-person infant perspective. Developmental Psychobiology. 2014; 56: 249–261. doi:
10.1002/dev.21183 PMID: 24285109

14.

McGurk H, MacDonald J. Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature. 1976; 264: 746–748. PMID: 1012311

15.

Rosenblum LD. Speech perception as a multimodal phenomenon. Current Directions in Psychological
Science. 2008; 17: 405–409. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8721.2008.00615.x PMID: 23914077

16.

Barenholtz E, Lewkowicz DJ, Davidson M, Mavica L. Categorical congruence facilitates multisensory
associative learning. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2014; 21: 1346–1352. doi: 10.3758/s13423014-0612-7 PMID: 24671776

17.

Kuhl PK, Meltzoff AN. Speech as an intermodal object of perception. In: Yonas A, editor. Perceptual
development in infacy: The Minnesota symposia on child psychology. Vol. 20. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum;
1988. p. 235–266.

18.

Patterson ML, Werker JF. Matching phonetic information in lips and voice is robust in 4.5-month-old
infants. Infant Behavior and Development. 1999; 22: 237–247.

19.

Patterson ML, Werker JF. Infants’ ability to match dynamic phonetic and gender information in the faceand voice. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2002; 81: 93–115. doi: 10.1006/jecp.2001.2644
PMID: 11741376

20.

Hillairet de Boisferon A, Dupierrix E, Quinn PC, Loevenbruck H, Lewkowicz DJ, Lee K, et al. Perceptionof multisensory gender coherence in 6- and 9-month-old infants. Infancy. 2015; 20: 661–674. doi: 10.
1111/infa.12088 PMID: 26561475

21.

Poulin-Dubois D, Serbin LA, Kenyon B, Derbyshire A. Infants intermodal knowledge about gender.
Developmental Psychology. 1994; 30: 436–442.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201712 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

22.

Walker-Andrews AS, Bahrick LE, Raglioni SS, Diaz I. Infants’ bimodal perception of gender. EcologicalPsychology. 1991; 3: 55–75.

23.

Trehub SE, Plantinga J, Brcic J. Infants detect cross-modal cues to identity in speech and singing.
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2009; 1169: 508–511. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2009.
04851.x PMID: 19673832

24.

Poulin-Dubois D, Serbin LA, Derbyshire A. Toddlers’ intermodal and verbal knowledge about gender.
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. 1998; 44: 338–354.

25.

Xiao NQG, Perrotta S, Quinn PC, Wang Z, Sun YHP, Lee K. On the facilitative effects of face motion on
face recognition and its development. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5: 1–16.

26.

Xiao NQG, Quinn PC, Liu SY, Ge LZ, Pascalis O, Lee K. Eye tracking reveals a crucial role for facial
motion in recognition of faces by infants. Developmental Psychology. 2015; 51: 744–757. doi: 10.1037/
dev0000019 PMID: 26010387

27.

Otsuka Y, Konishi Y, Kanazawa S, Yamaguchi MK, Abdi H, O’Toole AJ. Recognition of moving andstatic faces by young infants. Child Development. 2009; 80: 1259–1271. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.
2009.01330.x PMID: 19630907

28.

Klatt DH, Klatt LC. Analysis, synthesis, and perception of voice quality variations among female andmale talkers. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America. 1990; 87: 820–857. PMID: 2137837

29.

Van Borsel J, Janssens J, De Bodt M. Breathiness as a feminine voice characteristic: A perceptual
approach. Journal of Voice. 2009; 23: 291–294. doi: 10.1016/j.jvoice.2007.08.002 PMID: 18675534

30.

Cooper RP, Aslin RN. Preference for infant-directed speech in the 1st month after birth. Child Development. 1990; 61: 1584–1595. PMID: 2245748

31.

Fernald A. 5-month-old infants prefer to listen to motherese. Infant Behavior and Development. 1985;
8: 181–195.

32.

Kim HI, Johnson SP. Detecting ’infant-directedness’ in face and voice. Developmental Science. 2014;
17: 621–627. doi: 10.1111/desc.12146 PMID: 24576091

33.

Nakata T, Trehub SE. Infants’ responsiveness to maternal speech and singing. Infant Behavior andDevelopment. 2004; 27: 455–464.

34.

Pegg JE, Werker JF, Mcleod PJ. Preference for infant-directed over adult-directed speech—evidence
from 7-week-old infants. Infant Behavior and Development. 1992; 15: 325–345.

35.

Trainor LJ, Austin CM, Desjardins RN. Is infant-directed speech prosody a result of the vocal expressionof emotion? Psychological Science. 2000; 11: 188–195. PMID: 11273402

36.

Zangl R, Mills DL. Increased brain activity to infant-directed speech in 6-and 13-month-old infants.
Infancy. 2007; 11: 31–62.

37.

Schachner A, Hannon EE. Infant-directed speech drives social preferences in 5-month-old infants.
Developmental Psychology. 2011; 47: 19–25. doi: 10.1037/a0020740 PMID: 20873920

38.

Aslin RN. Interpretation of infant listening times using the headturn preference technique. International
Conference on Infant Studies; Brighton, England; 2000.

39.

Fernald A, Pinto JP, Swingley D, Weinberg A, McRoberts GW. Rapid gains in speed of verbal processing by infants in the 2nd year. Psychological Science. 1998; 9: 228–231.

40.

Thiessen ED, Hill EA, Saffran JR. Infant-directed speech facilitates word segmentation. Infancy. 2005;
7: 53–71.

41.

Trainor LJ, Desjardins RN. Pitch characteristics of infant-directed speech affect infants’ ability to discriminate vowels. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 2002; 9: 335–340. PMID: 12120797

42.

Knight B, Johnston A. The role of movement in face recognition. Visual Cognition. 1997; 4: 265–273.

43.

O’Toole AJ, Roark DA, Abdi H. Recognizing moving faces: A psychological and neural synthesis.
Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2002; 6: 261–266. PMID: 12039608

44.

Boersma P, Weenink D. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Ear & Hearing. 2011; 32: 266.

45.

Kelso JAS, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Saltzman EL, Kay B. A qualitative dynamic analysis of reiterant
speech production—phase portraits, kinematics, and dynamic modeling. The Journal of the AcousticalSociety of America. 1985; 77: 266–280. PMID: 3973219

46.

Loevenbruck H. Effets articulatoires de l’emphase contrastive sur la phrase accentuelle en français.
Proceedings of the Journées d’Etude de la Parole; Aussois, France; 2000. p. 165–168.

47.

Loevenbruck H. An investigation of articulatory correlates of the accentual phrase in French. Proceedings of the 14th International Congress of Phonetic Sciences; San Francisco, CA; 1999. p. 667–670.

48.

Dohen M, Loevenbruck H, Hill H. Recognizing prosody from the lips: Is it possible to extract prosodic
focus from lip features? In: Wee-Chung-Liew A, Wang S, editors. Visual speech recognition: Lip segmentation and mapping. Hershey, PA: Medical Information Science Reference; 2009. p. 416–438.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201713 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants

49.

Keating PA, Lindblom B, Lubker J, Kreiman J. Variability in jaw height for segments in english and swedish VCVs. Journal of Phonetics. 1994; 22: 407–422.

50.

Fernald A. Human maternal vocalizations to infants as biologically relevant signals. In: Barkow J, Cosmides L, Tooby J, editors. The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture.
Oxford: Oxford University Press; 1992.

51.

Lewkowicz DJ. Infants’ response to the audible and visible properties of the human face: II. Discrimination of differences between singing and adult-directed speech. Developmental Psychobiology. 1998;
32: 261–274. PMID: 9589215

52.

Trainor LJ, Clark ED, Huntley A, Adams BA. The acoustic basis of preferences for infant-directed singing. Infant Behavior and Development. 1997; 20: 383–396.

53.

Trehub SE, Nakata T. Emotion and music in infancy. Musicae Scientiae, Special Issue. 2001– 2002:
37–61.

54.

Andruski JE, Kuhl PK. The acoustic structure of vowels in infant- and adult-directed speech. Biannual
Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development; Washington, DC; 1997.

55.

Fernald A, Simon T. Expanded intonation contours in mothers speech to newborns. Developmental
Psychology. 1984; 20: 104–113.

56.

Papousek M, Papousek H, Haekel M. Didactic adjustments in fathers and mothers speech to their 3month-old infants. Journal of Psycholinguist Research. 1987; 16: 491–516.

57.

Fernald A, Taeschner T, Dunn J, Papousek M, de Boysson-Bardies B, Fukui I. A cross-language studyof prosodic modifications in mothers and fathers speech to preverbal infants. Journal of Child Language.
1989; 16: 477–501. PMID: 2808569

58.

Rose SA, Feldman JF, Jankowski JJ. Infant visual recognition memory: Independent contributions ofspeed and attention. Developmental Psychology. 2003; 39: 563–571. PMID: 12760523

59.

Dunst CJ, Hamby DW. Guide for calculating and interpreting effect sizes and confidence intervals in
intellectual and developmental disability research studies. Journal of Intellectual and Developmental
Disability. 2012; 37: 89–99. doi: 10.3109/13668250.2012.673575 PMID: 22530580

60.

Csibra G, Gergely G. Social learning and social cognition: The case for pedagogy. Attention and Performance. 2006: 249–274.

61.

Kaplan PS, Bachorowski JA, Smoski MJ, Hudenko WJ. Infants of depressed mothers, although competent learners, fail to learn in response to their own mothers’ infant-directed speech. Psychological Science. 2002; 13: 268–271. PMID: 12009049

62.

Kaplan PS, Bachorowski JA, Zarlengo-Strouse P. Child-directed speech produced by mothers withsymptoms of depression fails to promote associative learning in 4-month-old infants. Child Development. 1999; 70: 560–570. PMID: 10368910

63.

Liu HM, Kuhl PK, Tsao FM. An association between mothers’ speech clarity and infants’ speech discrimination skills. Developmental Science. 2003; 6: F1–F10.

64.

Werker JF, Pons F, Dietrich C, Kajikawa S, Fais L, Amano S. Infant-directed speech supports phonetic
category learning in English and Japanese. Cognition. 2007; 103: 147–162. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.
2006.03.006 PMID: 16707119

65.

Fernald A, Kuhl P. Acoustic determinants of infant preference for motherese speech. Infant Behavior
and Development. 1987; 10: 279–293.

66.

Papousek M, Papousek H, Symmes D. The meanings of melodies in motherese in tone and stress languages. Infant Behavior and Development. 1991; 14: 415–440.

67.

Kim HI, Johnson SP. Do young infants prefer an infant-directed face or a happy face? International
Journal of Behavioral Development. 2013; 37: 125–130.

68.

Newman RS, Hussain I. Changes in preference for infant-directed speech in low and moderate noise by
4.5-to 13-month-olds. Infancy. 2006; 10: 61–76.

69.

Ramsey-Rennels JL, Langlois JH. Infants’ differential processing of female and male faces. Current
Directions in Psychological Science. 2006; 15: 59–62.

70.

Coulon M, Guellai B, Streri A. Recognition of unfamiliar talking faces at birth. International Journal of
Behavioral Development. 2011; 35: 282–287.

71.

Guellai B, Coulon M, Streri A. The role of motion and speech in face recognition at birth. Visual Cognition. 2011; 19: 1212–1233.

72.

Lewkowicz DJ, Minar NJ, Tift AH, Brandon M. Perception of the multisensory coherence of fluent audiovisual speech in infancy: Its emergence and the role of experience. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 2015; 130: 147–162. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2014.10.006 PMID: 25462038

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201714 / 15

Audio-Visual Perception of Gender by Infants73.

Homa D, Sterling S, Trepel L. Limitations of exemplar-based generalization and the abstraction of categorical information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory. 1981; 7: 418–
439.

74.

Rosch E, Mervis CB, Gray WD, Johnson DM, Boyes-Braem P. Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology. 1976; 8: 382–439.

PLOS ONE | DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0169325 January 6, 201715 / 15