Concordance of Visual and Manipulative Responses to Novel and Familiar Stimuli: A Reply to Rubenstein (1974)

Rubenstein's failure to find evidence for the previously suggested lack of concordance between visual and manipulative responses to novel and familiar stimuli in 6-month-old infants is discussed. It is shown that a lack of concordance is not specific to the use of 1 measure of manipulative behavior, and other possible explanations for the discrepancy in findings are examined. A 2-stage development of responsiveness to familiarity-novelty in infancy remains the most plausible account.