Other Assignments

Created by Elanor Gibson and Richard Walk in 1960 to investigate the ability of newborn animals and human infants to detect depth.

If the animals/young humans crawled over the apparent cliff, it could be assumed that the ability to see depth was not inborn. If they did not go over the cliff, it would support the idea that perceptual abilities are innate.

How does it work?

The psychologists developed a test in which babies were placed on a large table of Plexiglass that was about a foot off the ground. One side of the plexiglass was covered in a tiled pattern that you might see on any floor. The other side of the plexiglass was left as it is – completely transparent. The pattern continued on the floor below the plexiglass. 

The researchers put the baby on the side with the first side of the Plexiglass and their mother on the other side. If the baby were to crawl to the mother, they would have to make a decision about whether or not to cross the visual cliff. If the baby was hesitant, thought the researchers, then it was presumed that the baby could perceive the depth and was scared to fall off the visual cliff.

Animals Versus Babies

Like the results of the studies focused on infants, the animal studies weren't so cut and dry. Researchers also took note of whether some of the participants were raised in the dark or raised in the light. The kittens that were raised in the dark were less likely to have developed depth perception than the ones raised in the light. Rats weren’t hesitant to run across the glass cliff, as they rely on smell and touch more than vision. 

Validity

There were many confounding results that didn't lead to a specific and determinate result. Many factors came into play which the researchers didn't think about. Rats, more than babies, lacked perception because they do not primarily use vision. The type of animal would have to be taken into account, such as kittens. Other animals behaved as hoped and did not cross the bridge onto the other side.