Social Learning and Imitation

Miller, Neal E.; Dollard, John

doi:10.1097/00005053-194402000-00051

Cited by 638 publications

(409 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

394

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…cognitive schema) of the model's behavior that outlasts the modeling situation and thus enables learners to exhibit the observed and novel behavior at later occasions. This is an important extension of earlier research on imitation in the behaviorist tradition (Miller and Dollard 1941) and implies that observational learning can occur without imitation taking place. In acquiring this representation, it is, first and foremost, required that the learner pays attention to the relevant aspects of the modeled behavior, and "selective attention is, therefore, one of the crucial subfunctions in observational learning" (Bandura 1986, p. 51).…”

Section: Why Is Example-based Learning Effective?supporting

confidence: 53%

Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Example-based learning has been studied from different perspectives. Cognitive research has mainly focused on worked examples, which typically provide students with a written worked-out didactical solution to a problem to study. Social-cognitive research has mostly focused on modeling examples, which provide students the opportunity to observe an adult or a peer model performing the task. The model can behave didactically or naturally, and the observation can take place face to face, on video, as a screen recording of the model's computer screen, or as an animation. This article reviews the contributions of the research on both types of example-based learning on questions such as why examplebased learning is effective, for what kinds of tasks and learners it is effective, and how examples should be designed and delivered to students to optimize learning. This will show both the commonalities and the differences in research on example-based learning conducted from both perspectives and might inspire the identification of new research questions. Bandura's (1977Bandura's ( , 1986) social learning theory. Both argue that it would be Educ Psychol Rev (2010) 22:155-174 Keywords

show abstract

Section: Why Is Example-based Learning Effective?supporting

confidence: 53%

Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This idea is not new (Miller, 1944;Miller & Dollard, 1941), but it has newly come to the fore during the past 2 decades. Different terms are used in different areas.…”

Section: Background: Approach and Avoidance Asmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications.

Carver¹,

Harmon‐Jones²

2009

Psychological Bulletin

1,374

1,165

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors review a range of evidence concerning the motivational underpinnings of anger as an affect, with particular reference to the relationship between anger and anxiety or fear. The evidence supports the view that anger relates to an appetitive or approach motivational system, whereas anxiety relates to an aversive or avoidance motivational system. This evidence appears to have 2 implications. One implication concerns the nature of anterior cortical asymmetry effects. The evidence suggests that such asymmetry reflects direction of motivational engagement (approach vs. withdrawal) rather than affective valence. The other implication concerns the idea that affects form a purely positive dimension and a purely negative dimension, which reflect the operation of appetitive and aversive motivational systems, respectively. The evidence reviewed does not support that view. The evidence is, however, consistent with a discrete-emotions view (which does not rely on dimensionality) and with an alternative dimensional approach.Keywords: anger, approach, appetitive system, avoidance, threat system Recent years have seen a surge of interest in emotional experience (e.g., Barrett, Niedenthal, & Winkielman, 2005;Dalgleish & Power, 1999;Davidson, Scherer, & Goldsmith, 2003;Frijda, 2007; Lane & Nadel, 2000;Lewis & Haviland-Jones, 2000;Ortony, Clore, & Collins, 1988;Panksepp, 1998; Rottenberg & Johnson, 2007; Scherer, Schorr, & Johnstone, 2001). Views of emotion vary considerably, in several respects. As one example, some people view emotions as a set of distinct modular entities, often considered basic emotions (e.g., Ekman, 1992;Izard, 1991;Izard & Ackerman, 2000;Levenson, 1994Levenson, , 1999Panksepp, 1998;Roseman, 1991). Others hold that affects are best understood by reference to underlying dimensions (e.g., Barrett, 2006;Cacioppo, Gardner, & Berntson, 1999;Carver & Scheier, 1998;Davidson, 1998;Gray, 1994a;Lang, Bradley, & Cuthbert, 1992Russell, 2003;Russell & Carroll, 1999a, 1999bWatson, Wiese, Vaidya, & Tellegen, 1999;Yik, Russell, & Barrett, 1999). AngerThis article focuses on one specific affect-anger. Specifically, it addresses the relationship of this affect to broad motivational tendencies of approach and avoidance, and it considers implications of that relationship for two areas of thought and research. We begin with a few words about definitions.Sometimes the terms affect, feeling, and emotion are treated as interchangeable (e.g., Isen, 2000); sometimes they are distinguished from each other (e.g., Fredrickson, 2001;. Affect is generally used to imply a hedonic experience, a sense of valence, a subjective sense of positivity or negativity arising from an event. When many use the word emotion, it is with that sense in mind. As Frijda (2000) put it, "For many theorists, the essence of emotion is feeling, and notably 'affect,' here used in the sense of a feeling of pleasure or pain . . . ." (p. 63). As Ortony et al. (1988) put it, emotions are ". . valenced reactions to events, agents, or objects . ." (p. 13). T...

show abstract

“…Numerous authors have pointed out tThe ability of humans to imitate actions at multiple levels, either in terms of goals (or effects) or of movements (e.g., Koffka, 1924Koffka, /1959Miller & Dollard, 1941;Morgan, 1900;Stränger & Hommel, 1995), which areis associated with different patterns of neural activity (Chaminade, Meltzoff, & Decety, 2002). Nevertheless, prevalence is often attributed to goals (e.g., Bekkering, Wohlschläger, & Gattis, 2000;Prinz, 2002;Wohlschläger, Gattis, & Bekkering, 2003).…”

Section: Common Coding Of Movements Vs Goalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic imitation of biomechanically possible and impossible actions: Effects of priming movements versus goals.

Longo¹,

Kosobud²,

Bertenthal³

2008

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Perfor

102

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent behavioral, neuroimaging, and neurophysiological research suggest a common representational code mediating the observation and execution of actions; yet, the nature of this representational code is not well understood. We address this question by investigating whether this observation-execution matching system (or mirror system) codes both the constituent movements of an action as well as its goal, and how such sensitivity is influenced by the topdown effects of instructions. Automatic imitation of observed finger actions was tested by manipulating whether the movements were biomechanically possible or impossible, while holding the goal constant. When no mention was made of this difference (Experiment 1), comparable automatic imitation was elicited from possible and impossible actions, suggesting that the actions had been coded at the level of the goal. When attention was drawn to the difference between possible and impossible movements (Experiment 2), only possible movements elicited automatic imitation. This sensitivity was specific to imitation, not affecting spatial S-R compatibility (Experiment 3). These results suggest that the human mirror system isautomatic imitation is modulated by top-down influences, coding actions in terms of both movements and goals depending on the focus of attention.

show abstract

Social Learning and Imitation

Cited by 638 publications

References 0 publications

Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives

Example-Based Learning: Integrating Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Research Perspectives

Anger is an approach-related affect: Evidence and implications.

Automatic imitation of biomechanically possible and impossible actions: Effects of priming movements versus goals.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About