1. Contents 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts 16.5 Imitation from Television 16.6 Changing motivations to imitate in development 16.7 Echolalia 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation 1

2. 2 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts Meltzoff: The behavioral re-enactment paradigm Emphasize the cognitive function of imitation to provide for the acquisition of new skills Understanding the Intentions of Others: Re-Enactment of Intended Acts by 18-Month-Old Children, 1995 18-month-olds Demonstrator Failing to produce specific actions on a range of novel objects (e.g. pulling apart a dumbbell apparatus). Read Intention Produced the outcomes

3. 3 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts

4. 4

5. 5

6. 6  Able to ‘see through’ the physical behavior of another  Discern his or her intention to complete an action  The middle of the second year: Infants develop a capacity for reading intentionality into the behavior of others.

7. 7 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts 18-month-olds Demonstrator May have imitated 1. To learn how to correctly use the objects 2. Produced the unconsummated acts wished to demonstrate to the model that they understood what he or she was trying to do. 3. To share effect 4. To demonstrate and communicate a sense of mutuality with the model who failed to successfully perform the act. 5. Do not re-enact the incomplete actions of inanimate objects, Social Motives

8. 8 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts

9. 9 Imitation in this paradigm is dependent on inter-personal factors The possibility that an individual act of imitation can be simultaneously motivated by both cognitive and social motives. 18-month-olds 1. A fully visible person saw attempted but incomplete actions demonstrated by one of our models 2. A person’s disembodied hands 3. A pair of disembodied mittens 4. A pair of mechanical robot pincers Produced the target actions Slaughter and Corbett: Differential copying of human and nonhuman models at 12 and 18 months of age, 2007

10. 10 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts 1.A fully visible person 3. A pair of disembodied mittens 2. A person’s disembodied hands 4. A pair of mechanical robot pincers

11. 11 16.4 Imitation of intended but incomplete acts

12. 12 16.5 Imitation from television Video HayneMeltzoff  15-month-old infants failed Imitate actions from a televised model  6 month-olds imitated from a live model.  Third year, infants will imitate more actions when the model is live than when he or she is presented on TV.  65% of 14-month-old infants successfully replicated an action they saw performed on TV by an experimenter.  A similar proportion (75%) of 14- month-olds replicated the same action when a live experimenter performed it.  Infants can imitate a televised model at similar levels to their imitations of a live model. Due to age-related changes in a fundamental cognitive process. When actions are modelled on TV, infants see a 2-D image that they must then match to the 3-D target object presented in the test phase. The overlap in surface features may not be enough for infants or young children to perceive the functional similarity of objects presented via these different modes.

13. 13 16.5 Imitation from television The Discrepancy HayneMeltzoff Used more complex three-step sequences Used simple one-step actions The televised model was presented on previously recorded video The televised model was presented live, via closed-circuit monitor. Was able to respond contingently to the infants, thereby providing a sense of social Interactivity even over the TV screen

14. 14 16.5 Imitation from television Differences between imitation from TV and imitation from a live model The lack of opportunity for inter-personal interaction inherent in pre-recorded video. Hypothesis will be warranted If the data are supportive, this would further highlight how social motivations may influence the expression of infants’ imitative skill

15. 15 16.6 Changing motivations to imitate in development How infants of varying ages respond differently to a model’s invitation to imitate ages 12,18 and 24 months (n=204) Hands Require Switch manipulation Experimenter Operate the switches Tools

16. 16 16.6 Changing motivations to imitate in development

17. 17 16.6 Changing motivations to imitate in development Hand ConditionTool Condition The older infants Older infants imitate more consistently than do younger infants. 24-month-olds No more likely to successfully open the boxes than 12-month-olds 12-month-olds only attempted to open the boxes with their hands

18. 18 16.6 Changing motivations to imitate in development Outcome 12-month-olds18-month-olds24-month-olds focused on the outcome of the model’s actions Showed reactions: intermediate between the older and younger age groups. focused on the specific form of the actions. Tool usage: Watched as a model successfully used an object after first ‘attempting but failing’ to activate the switches by hand. Subsequently used the object in an attempt to activate the switches. Attention to Reproduction of Details of a model’s behavior Older infants are not simply more competent imitators than younger infants, they engage in imitation differently. (Uzgiris 1981)

19. 19 16.7 Echolalia Video Echolalia Vocal Imitation The echoing or repetition of vocalizations made b y another person. Copying the actions of another Socially motivated Mature forms of Mimicry and parody Positive (entertaining) Negative (humiliating) Social ends Evolve into Mimicry: the act or art of copying or imitating closely Parody: an imitation of the style of a particular writer, artist, or genre with deliberate exaggeration for comic effect.

20. 20 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation So why do infants imitate? The acquisition of knowle dge about the world Development of a specific skill / Acquire a new skill To achieve a desired outcome. To initiate social interactio n and To maintain social interact ion Neonatal imitation Synchronic Imitation Echolalia

21. 21 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Uzgiris Infants’ tendencies to imitate, and their motivations for doing so, develop and change in the first few years of life. Imitation is not a unilateral cognitive achievement, but a rich cognitive and social tool. Imitation Flexibly used as means to a variety of different ends that may be dictated by developmental stage, social context, immediate motivations or all of these

22. 22 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Forms and Functions of Imitation Joint Attention Language Acquisition of Key Social-Cognitive Skills at the end of the first year of life.

23. 23 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Forms and Functions of Imitation Complements of other modes of communication Performed for fun and entertainment Be like someone else Express mutuality to the imitative partner

24. 24 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Forms and Functions of Imitation Meta-representation Mental time-travel Complex cognitive skills Cognitive (learning) Social (communicative, inter-personal, emotional)

25. 25 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Imitative ‘mirroring’ Neuropsychological Findings Imitation: Innate component

26. 26 16.8 The multi-faceted nature of imitation Imitation Multiple Contexts for Multipl e Purposes Any Number of Personal Inter-Personal Situational Variables Multiple Motivations Cognitive, Social, Emotional ends Highly flexible

27. 27 Robot Learns like a Toddler University of Plymouth