Science still does not know when consciousness begins
Researchers are finding increasing evidence of complex brain activity in young babies, but no decisive test for experience.
The question of whether babies have consciousness remains scientifically open. Research into brain networks, attention and behaviour provides indications of early conscious processing, but no experiment can ask a baby what it is experiencing.
In adults, researchers can partly link consciousness to reporting: someone can describe what they see or feel. That possibility is absent in babies. Scientists must therefore use indirect signals, such as looking time, responses to stimuli, brain activity and connections between different areas of the brain.
An open review article on the development of infant consciousness describes how researchers examine, among other things, networks for attention, the integration of information and prediction. The emergence of such signals does not automatically mean that a baby has the same form of self-awareness as an adult.
A review study published in 2026 in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience also discusses the interaction between parent and child. The authors identify EEG measurements and simultaneous brain measurements as ways of investigating how interaction and mutual regulation develop. The article is a scientific perspective study, not evidence that two people literally form a single consciousness.
Large-scale developmental research also reveals the uncertainty. In the ManyBabies project, 67 laboratories collaborated on research into babies’ preference for baby talk. The average result indicated a preference, but the differences between laboratories and individual children were large.
That variation is relevant to consciousness research. An absent behavioural response may mean that a baby has not processed a stimulus, but it may also mean that the behaviour used is not a good measure. Conversely, looking at an image for longer does not in itself prove that there is a conscious experience.
The most cautious conclusion is therefore that young babies probably possess more complex information processing than old simplifications assumed, while the point at which subjective experience begins remains unknown. The peer-reviewed literature consists largely of review studies and studies using indirect measurements; there is no widely accepted decisive test.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The article sticks to indirect indications and identifies the limitations of research involving non-speaking participants. The sources used are scientific publications and are not presented as definitive evidence.
- confirmed Researchers use behaviour and brain activity, among other things, as indirect signals in babies. — Described in Communications Psychology. source
- confirmed The 2026 Frontiers article is a scientific perspective study on parent-child interaction and consciousness. — The publication details and subject are given in the source. source
- confirmed The ManyBabies study involved 67 laboratories. — Mentioned in Communications Psychology. source
- confirmed There is no widely accepted decisive test for consciousness in babies. — The review literature describes the indirect and as yet undecided nature of the measurements. source
Editor's note
The sources are peer-reviewed or scientific review articles. They support indications of complex early processing, but not the firm conclusion that the moment consciousness begins has been scientifically established.Sources
- What 5000 babies can tell us about developing minds and how to study them — Communications Psychology / Nature
- A two-person neuroscience perspective on parent-infant dyadic expansion of consciousness — Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
- Markers of consciousness in infants: Towards a cluster-based approach — Acta Paediatrica