Evaluating the Nature of the Still‐Face Effect in the Double Face‐to‐Face Still‐Face Paradigm Using Different Comparison Groups

The current study explored two possible comparison groups for the double Face‐to‐Face Still‐Face (FFSF) paradigm to evaluate their effects on infant behavior and different hypotheses about the nature of the Still‐Face (SF) effect, an effect not fully understood. Mothers and their 4‐month‐old infants were randomly assigned to one of three groups, a double FFSF group (Group_FFSF, n = 44), a control, semi‐structured play group (Group_Story, n = 46), or a control, unstructured play group (Group_Play, n = 28). As hypothesized, Group_FFSF infants exhibited the classic SF response (decreased positive affect and gaze to mother; increased negative affect) and Group_Play infants showed an increase in negative affect over episodes. Contrary to expectations, Group_Story infants displayed a similar, but less intense, pattern of behavior as Group_FFSF. Taken together, the findings indicate that multiple episodes of face‐to‐face play exceeded 4‐month‐olds' regulatory capacities and that infants are sensitive to shared communicative intentions and violations of social expectations, whether these violations are negative or positive in nature.