The role of objects and effects in action imitation: Comparing the imitation of object-related actions vs. gestures in 18-month-old infants

Abstract

a b s t r a c tThis study aimed to systematically investigate 18-month-old infants' imitation of objectrelated actions compared to motorically similar gestures. An additional goal of the study was to examine the role of action effects on infants' imitation of target actions. One group of infants (n = 17) observed object-related actions and gestures leading to salient effects (sounds or visual resp. social effects), and the other group (n = 16) watched the same actions without effects. Furthermore, this study examined whether infants show a consistent imitation ability for object-related actions and gestures. First, the present study showed that 18-month-old infants imitated object-related actions more frequently than gestures. Second, the presence of an effect significantly increased the imitation rate of object-related actions; however, this difference was not found for gestures. Third, indications for a general imitation ability were found as results on an individual level showed that object-related action imitation significantly correlated with gesture imitation. Implications of the results for theory and future studies are discussed with a focus on the role of objects and effects in 18-month-old infants' action imitation.

What drives young children to over-imitate? Investigating the effects of age, context, action type, and transitivity

“…To date, only a small number of studies with infants have compared imitation of gestures and object-directed actions (Abravanel, Levan-Goldschmidt, & Stevenson, 1976;Christie & Slaughter, 2009;Kim et al, 2015;Rodgon & Kurdek, 1977;Zmyj et al, 2012). We use the term gesture to refer to "discrete, mechanically ineffective physical movements of the body produced during period of intentional communication" (Hobaiter & Byrne, 2011).…”

“…they are transitive. Previous research suggests that infants are more likely to imitate transitive actions as compared to intransitive ones (Kim et al, 2015), perhaps because infants perceive transitive actions to be more causally-relevant for achieving instrumental goals. Nevertheless, the apparent overlap between context and action transitivity, has not been directly investigated before.…”

“…Therefore, in order to tease apart these two inter-connected influences, we additionally examined the interaction between context (normative, communicative, instrumental) and action transitivity (whether the agent is in contact with the object) on children's over-imitation. Based on previous research (Kim et al, 2015), we expected children to show a stronger tendency to imitate transitive actions as compared to intransitive ones. Moreover, if transitivity does interact with context ,then we should expect more imitation of intransitive actions within a communicative context and more imitation of transitive actions within the instrumental context.…”

“…Moreover, if transitivity does interact with context ,then we should expect more imitation of intransitive actions within a communicative context and more imitation of transitive actions within the instrumental context. Finally, we were interested in whether the type of action itself might also influence children's imitation (Gergley & Csibra, 2006;Kim et al, 2015). Although previous studies have examined imitation of unusual body-part actions, such as the forehead (e.g.…”

Discusiones Metodológicas en el Estudio del Desarrollo de la Intencionalidad Compartida en Niños: Una Revisión Sistemática

“…Dado lo anterior, la metodología de unsuccessful actions ha resultado útil en el estudio de la comprensión de intenciones (Brandone, Horwitz, Aslin & Wellman, 2014;Brandone & Wellman, 2009;Call, Hare, Carpenter & Tomasello, 2004;Carpenter, Akhtar & Tomasello, 1998;Kim, Óturai. Király & Knopf, 2015;Legerstee & Markova, 2008;Olineck & Poulin-Dubois, 2005;Southgate & Csibra, 2009;Warneken & Tomasello, 2006).…”