Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates.
07 Oct 1977-Science (American Association for the Advancement of Science)-Vol. 198, Iss: 4312, pp 75-78
TL;DR: Infants between 12 and 21 days of age can imitate both facial and manual gestures; this behavior cannot be explained in terms of either conditioning or innate releasing mechanisms.
Abstract: Infants between 12 and 21 days of age can imitate both facial and manual gestures; this behavior cannot be explained in terms of either conditioning or innate releasing mechanisms. Such imitation implies that human neonates can equate their own unseen behaviors with gestures they see others perform.
Citations
More filters
7,489 citations
TL;DR: The authors suggest that the mechanism involved is the perception-behavior link, the recently documented finding that the mere perception of another's behavior automatically increases the likelihood of engaging in that behavior oneself.
Abstract: The chameleon effect refers to nonconscious mimicry of the postures, mannerisms, facial expressions, and other behaviors of one's interaction partners, such that one's behavior passively and unintentionally changes to match that of others in one's current social environment. The authors suggest that the mechanism involved is the perception-behavior link, the recently documented finding (e.g., J. A. Bargh, M. Chen, & L. Burrows, 1996) that the mere perception of another's behavior automatically increases the likelihood of engaging in that behavior oneself. Experiment 1 showed that the motor behavior of participants unintentionally matched that of strangers with whom they worked on a task. Experiment 2 had confederates mimic the posture and movements of participants and showed that mimicry facilitates the smoothness of interactions and increases liking between interaction partners. Experiment 3 showed that dispositionally empathic individuals exhibit the chameleon effect to a greater extent than do other people.
3,711 citations
Cites background from "Imitation of facial and manual gest..."
...Facial mimicry research has focused on neonates' mimicry of adult facial expressions (Meltzoff & Moore, 1977, 1979, 1983; cf. Kaitz, Meschulach-Sarfaty, Auerbach, & Eidelman, 1988)....
[...]
TL;DR: It is argued and present evidence that great apes understand the basics of intentional action, but they still do not participate in activities involving joint intentions and attention (shared intentionality), and children's skills of shared intentionality develop gradually during the first 14 months of life.
Abstract: We propose that the crucial difference between human cognition and that of other species is the ability to participate with others in collaborative activities with shared goals and intentions: shared intentionality. Participation in such activities requires not only especially powerful forms of intention reading and cultural learning, but also a unique motivation to share psychological states with oth- ers and unique forms of cognitive representation for doing so. The result of participating in these activities is species-unique forms of cultural cognition and evolution, enabling everything from the creation and use of linguistic symbols to the construction of social norms and individual beliefs to the establishment of social institutions. In support of this proposal we argue and present evidence that great apes (and some children with autism) understand the basics of intentional action, but they still do not participate in activities involving joint intentions and attention (shared intentionality). Human children's skills of shared intentionality develop gradually during the first 14 months of life as two ontogenetic pathways intertwine: (1) the general ape line of understanding others as animate, goal-directed, and intentional agents; and (2) a species-unique motivation to share emotions, experience, and activities with other persons. The develop- mental outcome is children's ability to construct dialogic cognitive representations, which enable them to participate in earnest in the collectivity that is human cognition.
3,660 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors review evidence that the ability to exercise such conscious, intentional control is actually quite limited, so that most of moment-to-moment psychological life must occur through nonconscious means if it is to occur at all.
Abstract: What was noted by E. J. hanger (1978) remains true today: that much of contemporary psychological research is based on the assumption that people are consciously and systematically processing incoming information in order to construe and interpret their world and to plan and engage in courses of action. As did E. J. hanger, the authors question this assumption. First, they review evidence that the ability to exercise such conscious, intentional control is actually quite limited, so that most of moment-to-mom ent psychological life must occur through nonconscious means if it is to occur at all. The authors then describe the different possible mechanisms that produce automatic, environmental control over these various phenomena and review evidence establishing both the existence of these mechanisms as well as their consequences for judgments, emotions, and behavior. Three major forms of automatic self-regulation are identified: an automatic effect of perception on action, automatic goal pursuit, and a continual automatic evaluation of one's experience. From the accumulating evidence, the authors conclude that these various nonconscious mental systems perform the lion's share of the self-regulatory burden, beneficently keeping the individual grounded in his or her current environment. The strongest knowledge—that of the total unfreedom of the human will—is nonetheless the poorest in successes, for it always has the strongest opponent: human vanity. —Nietzsche, Human, All Too Human
3,436 citations
Cites background from "Imitation of facial and manual gest..."
...…body movements ("movement synchrony"; e.g., Bernieri, 1988; Condon & Ogston, 1966), the imitation of facial expressions of adult models by infants (Meltzoff & Moore, 1977, 1983), and "behavior matching," in which people mimic behavior patterns by adopting similar postures or showing similar body…...
[...]
TL;DR: Experiment 1 showed that participants whose concept of rudeness was printed interrupted the experimenter more quickly and frequently than did participants primed with polite-related stimuli, consistent with the content of that stereotype.
Abstract: Previous research has shown that trait concepts and stereotypes become active automatically in the presence of relevant behavior or stereotyped-group features. Through the use of the same priming procedures as in previous impression formation research, Experiment l showed that participants whose concept of rudeness was primed interrupted the experimenter more quickly and frequently than did participants primed with polite-related stimuli. In Experiment 2, participants for whom an elderly stereotype was primed walked more slowly down the hallway when leaving the experiment than did control participants, consistent with the content of that stereotype. In Experiment 3, participants for whom the African American stereotype was primed subliminally reacted with more hostility to a vexatious request of the experimenter. Implications of this automatic behavior priming effect for self-fulfilling prophecies are discussed, as is whether social behavior is necessarily mediated by conscious choice processes.
3,392 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1956
TL;DR: This is the revision of the classic text in the field, adding two new chapters and thoroughly updating all others as discussed by the authors, and the original structure is retained, and the book continues to serve as a combined text/reference.
Abstract: This is the revision of the classic text in the field, adding two new chapters and thoroughly updating all others. The original structure is retained, and the book continues to serve as a combined text/reference.
35,552 citations
231 citations
TL;DR: None of these learning theses deals with the fact that imitation requires the infant to consistently abstract similar features from stimuli which differ on various dimensions, so consideration is given to the role of cognition in a theory of learning to imitate.
Abstract: Theories of imitation learning are examined regarding their account of how the infant acquires the ability to emit a response which resembles a response previously exhibited by another. Each theory suffers from 1 or more of the following problems: logical inconsistency, incompleteness, and lack of empirical support. 3 of the views (associative thesis, discriminative learning thesis, and acquired value of the relational stimulus of similarity) are not mutually exclusive, and, therefore, they could be included in a theory of learning to imitate. However, none of these learning theses deals with the fact that imitation requires the infant to consistently abstract similar features from stimuli which differ on various dimensions. Hence, consideration is given to the role of cognition in a theory of learning to imitate.
34 citations