Cultural Variations in Children’s Mirror Self-Recognition

Abstract

Western children first show signs of mirror self-recognition (MSR) from 18 to 24 months of age, the benchmark index of emerging self-concept. Such signs include self-oriented behaviors while looking at the mirror to touch or remove a mark surreptitiously placed on the child's face. The authors attempted to replicate this finding across cultures using a simplified version of the classic "mark test." In Experiment 1, Kenyan children (N = 82, 18 to 72 months old) display a pronounced absence of spontaneous self-oriented behaviors toward the mark. In Experiment 2, the authors tested children in Fiji, Saint Lucia, Grenada, and Peru (N = 133, 36 to 55 months old), as well as children from urban United States and rural Canada. As expected from existing reports, a majority of the Canadian and American children demonstrate spontaneous self-oriented behaviors toward the mark. However, markedly fewer children from the non-Western rural sites demonstrate such behaviors. These results suggest that there are profound cross-cultural differences in the meaning of the MSR test, questioning the validity of the mark test as a universal index of self-concept in children's development.

Just Before I Recognize Myself: The Role of Featural and Multisensory Cues Leading up to Explicit Mirror Self‐Recognition

“…Overall, our results contribute to the growing literature that investigates the link between familiarity to one's own facial features and the ability to exhibit explicit mirror self‐recognition. However, assuming that the mirror‐test is a valid measure of self‐recognition (for critics on the validity and meaning of the test, see Bahrick et al., ; Broesch, Callaghan, Henrich, Murphy, & Rochat, ; Heyes, , ; Rochat, , ), we suggest that the way infants process their own self‐image changes during the first 2 years of life. In line with Nielsen et al.…”

Self-Recognition and Self-Regulation: The Relationship with Socialization Trajectories and Children's Sex

“…The tasks used have limitations and their range needs to be broadened to capture the different aspects of self development. Moreover, as pointed out by Broesch et al (2010), in future studies it is necessary to improve and control the procedures used, especially in cross-cultural studies, such as familiarity of the experimenter with the child, instructions that are given to children, nature of the mark and to place on the child's body where it is made. The results of differences between boys and girls could be interpreted as being due to girls being more familiarized with lipsticks than boys.…”

“…We can study how this basic predisposition follows different trajectories in different cultural backgrounds. For this, we take Rochat (2010) conception of self as a phenotype, product of the relations of the genotype and the environment, and the idea of a construct that includes the notion of person, and, in a way his/her personality (Kagitçibasi, 2007), the 'I-self', and the 'me-self'. The first relates to the self as agent of knowledge.…”

“…The recent study of Broesch, Callaghan, Henrich, Murphy, and Rochat (2010) brings new evidence on cultural differences on self-recognition. They include some samples not previously studied by other authors, such Kenya and SELF-RECOGNITION AND SELF-REGULATION Fiji, comparing children from non-Western rural communities and two Western urban ones.…”

Cultural differences in self‐recognition: the early development of autonomous and related selves?

“…Rather than indicating a lack of MSR, Broesch et al . () speculate that these ‘failures’ may be indicative of the cultural variations in autonomy. Although children in Western cultures are encouraged to be independent, and so are disposed to explore the mark, non‐Western cultures often encourage compliance.…”