Gender‐related differences in neonatal imitation

Nagy, Emese; Kompagne, Hajnalka; Orvos, Hajnalka; Pál, Attila

doi:10.1002/icd.497

Cited by 46 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 30 publications

(29 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, neonatal imitators had fewer looks away during a face-to-face interaction at three months of age compared with non-imitators [44,45]. In another recent study, female infants were found to imitate finger movements more than male infants [34], consistent with adult studies that demonstrate females have greater mu suppression when viewing actions [122,123].…”

Section: Neonatal Imitation As a Predictor Of Later Developmental Outsupporting

confidence: 67%

The mirror neuron system as revealed through neonatal imitation: presence from birth, predictive power and evidence of plasticity

Simpson

Murray

Paukner

et al. 2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

122

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is strong evidence that neonates imitate previously unseen behaviours. These behaviours are predominantly used in social interactions, demonstrating neonates' ability and motivation to engage with others. Research on neonatal imitation can provide a wealth of information about the early mirror neuron system (MNS), namely its functional characteristics, its plasticity from birth and its relation to skills later in development. Although numerous studies document the existence of neonatal imitation in the laboratory, little is known about its natural occurrence during parent -infant interactions and its plasticity as a consequence of experience. We review these critical aspects of imitation, which we argue are necessary for understanding the early action-perception system. We address common criticisms and misunderstandings about neonatal imitation and discuss methodological differences among studies. Recent work reveals that individual differences in neonatal imitation positively correlate with later social, cognitive and motor development. We propose that such variation in neonatal imitation could reflect important individual differences of the MNS. Although postnatal experience is not necessary for imitation, we present evidence that neonatal imitation is influenced by experience in the first week of life.

show abstract

Section: Neonatal Imitation As a Predictor Of Later Developmental Outsupporting

confidence: 67%

The mirror neuron system as revealed through neonatal imitation: presence from birth, predictive power and evidence of plasticity

Simpson

Murray

Paukner

et al. 2014

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

122

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Results are shown in Figure 3 and reported as proportions of the total trial duration. Gender differences have been reported for early motor behavior with males being more active than females (Eaton & Enns, 1986) but females showing faster and more accurate neonatal imitation skills (Nagy, Kompagne, Orvos, & Pal, 2007). Therefore gender was controlled for in all analyses by inclusion as factor.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Teach to reach: The effects of active vs. passive reaching experiences on action and perception

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reaching is an important and early emerging motor skill that allows infants to interact with the physical and social world. However, few studies have considered how reaching experiences shape infants’ own motor development and their perception of actions performed by others. In the current study, two groups of infants received daily parent guided play sessions over a two-week training period. Using “Sticky Mittens”, one group was enabled to independently pick up objects whereas the other group only passively observed their parent’s actions on objects. Following training, infants’ manual and visual exploration of objects, agents, and actions in a live and a televised context were assessed. Our results showed that only infants who experienced independent object apprehension advanced in their reaching behavior, and showed changes in their visual exploration of agents and objects in a live setting. Passive observation was not sufficient to change infants’ behavior. To our surprise, the effects of the training did not seem to generalize to a televised observation context. Together, our results suggest that early motor training can jump-start infants’ transition into reaching and inform their perception of others’ actions.

show abstract

“…Only one study to date has specifically examined sex differences in neonatal imitation, and found that female neonates, compared to males, were more skilled at imitating finger movements (Nagy et al, 2007). More studies of sex differences in infants seem necessary, given that the ability to spontaneously mimic facial expressions may be a skill underlying several social behaviors and competences, including empathy (e.g., Oberman et al, 2007; Sonnby-Borgström, 2002).…”

Section: Sex Differences In the Development Of Empathy In Humansmentioning

confidence: 99%

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Christov-Moore

Simpson

Coudé

et al. 2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

753

479

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Evidence suggests that there are differences in the capacity for empathy between males and females. However, how deep do these differences go? Stereotypically, females are portrayed as more nurturing and empathetic, while males are portrayed as less emotional and more cognitive. Some authors suggest that observed gender differences might be largely due to cultural expectations about gender roles. However, empathy has both evolutionary and developmental precursors, and can be studied using implicit measures, aspects that can help elucidate the respective roles of culture and biology. This article reviews evidence from ethology, social psychology, economics, and neuroscience to show that there are fundamental differences in implicit measures of empathy, with parallels in development and evolution. Studies in nonhuman animals and younger human populations (infants/children) offer converging evidence that sex differences in empathy have phylogenetic and ontogenetic roots in biology and are not merely cultural byproducts driven by socialization. We review how these differences may have arisen in response to males’ and females’ different roles throughout evolution. Examinations of the neurobiological underpinnings of empathy reveal important quantitative gender differences in the basic networks involved in affective and cognitive forms of empathy, as well as a qualitative divergence between the sexes in how emotional information is integrated to support decision making processes. Finally, the study of gender differences in empathy can be improved by designing studies with greater statistical power and considering variables implicit in gender (e.g., sexual preference, prenatal hormone exposure). These improvements may also help uncover the nature of neurodevelopmental and psychiatric disorders in which one sex is more vulnerable to compromised social competence associated with impaired empathy.

show abstract

Gender‐related differences in neonatal imitation

Cited by 46 publications

References 30 publications

The mirror neuron system as revealed through neonatal imitation: presence from birth, predictive power and evidence of plasticity

The mirror neuron system as revealed through neonatal imitation: presence from birth, predictive power and evidence of plasticity

Teach to reach: The effects of active vs. passive reaching experiences on action and perception

Empathy: Gender effects in brain and behavior

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About