Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-684899dbb8-rbzxz Total loading time: 0.259 Render date: 2022-05-20T02:16:59.578Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true }

An unsettled debate: Key empirical and theoretical questions are still open

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 December 2017

Stefano Vincini
Affiliation:
UNAM Postdoctoral Fellowships Program, Instituto de Investigaciones Filosóficas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Ciudad Universitaria, C.P. 04510, Mexico City, Mexico. stefano.vincini@gmail.comhttp://www.filosoficas.unam.mx/sitio/stefano-vincini
Yuna Jhang
Affiliation:
Department of Speech Language and Audiology, Chung Shan University, Taichung 40201, Taiwan. yjhang@csmu.edu.twhttps://sites.google.com/site/yjhang13/
Eugene H. Buder
Affiliation:
School of Communication Sciences and Disorders, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152. ehbuder@memphis.eduhttps://umwa.memphis.edu/fcv/viewprofile.php?uuid=ehbuder The Institute for Intelligent Systems, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152
Shaun Gallagher
Affiliation:
The Institute for Intelligent Systems, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152 Department of Philosophy, The University of Memphis, Memphis, TN 38152. s.gallagher@memphis.edùhttp://www.ummoss.org Faculty of Law, Humanities and the Art, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, NSW 2522, Australia.

Abstract

Debates about neonatal imitation remain more open than Keven & Akins (K&A) imply. K&A do not recognize the primacy of the question concerning differential imitation and the links between experimental designs and more or less plausible theoretical assumptions. Moreover, they do not acknowledge previous theorizing on spontaneous behavior, the explanatory power of entrainment, and subtle connections with social cognition.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, M. (2016) Neural reuse in the organization and development of the brain. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology Review 58(S4):36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anisfeld, M. (2005) No compelling evidence to dispute Piaget's timetable of the development of representational imitation in infancy. In: Perspectives on imitation: From cognitive neuroscience to social science, vol. 2: Imitation, human development, and culture, ed. Hurley, S. & Chater, N., pp. 107–32. MIT.Google Scholar
Coulon, M., Hemimou, C. & Streri, A. (2013) Effects of seeing and hearing vowels on neonatal facial imitation. Infancy 18(5):782–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dehaene, S. (2009) Reading in the brain: The new science of how we read. Penguin.Google Scholar
Gallagher, S. (2008) Inference or interaction: Social cognition without precursors. Philosophical Explorations 11(3):163–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallagher, S., Butterworth, G. E., Lew, A. & Cole, J. (1998) Hand–mouth coordination, congenital absence of limb, and evidence for innate body schemas. Brain and Cognition 38(1):5365.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gallagher, S. & Meltzoff, A. (1996) The earliest sense of self and other: Merleau-Ponty and recent developmental studies. Philosophical Psychology 9(2):211–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, S. S. (2009) The development of imitation in infancy. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 364(1528):2325–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meltzoff, A. N. (2002) Imitation as a mechanism of social cognition: Origins of empathy, theory of mind, and the representation of action. In: Handbook of childhood cognitive development, ed. Goswami, U., pp. 625. Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N. (2009) Roots of social cognition: The like-me framework. In: Minnesota symposia on child psychology: Meeting the challenge of translational research in child psychology, vol. 35, ed. Cicchetti, D. & Gunnar, M. R., pp. 2958. Wiley.Google Scholar
Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, M. K. (1977) Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science 198(4312):7578. Available at: http://science.sciencemag.org/content/198/4312/75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, M. K. (1992) Early imitation within a functional framework: The importance of person identity, movement, and development. Infant Behavior and Development 15(4):479505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, M. K. (1997) Explaining facial imitation: A theoretical model. Early Development and Parenting 6(3–4):179–92.3.0.CO;2-R>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oostenbroek, J., Suddendorf, T., Nielsen, M., Redshaw, J., Kennedy-Costantini, S., Davis, J., Clark, S. & Slaughter, V. (2016) Comprehensive longitudinal study challenges the existence of neonatal imitation in humans. Current Biology 26(10):1334–38. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2016.03.047.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pikovsky, A., Rosenblum, M. & Kurths, J. (2001) Synchronization: A universal concept in nonlinear sciences. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ray, E. & Heyes, C. (2011) Imitation in infancy: The wealth of the stimulus. Developmental Science 14(1):92105. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00961.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thelen, E. (1979) Rhythmical stereotypies in normal human infants. Animal Behaviour 27(Pt. 3):699715.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thelen, E. (1981b) Rhythmical behavior in infancy: An ethological perspective. Developmental Psychology 17(3):237–57. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.17.3.237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vincini, S. & Jhang, Y. (revised and resubmitted). Association but not recognition: An alternative model for early imitation from 0 to 2 months.Google Scholar
Vincini, S., Jhang, Y., Buder, E. H. & Gallagher, S. (2017) Neonatal imitation: Theory, experimental design, and significance for the field of social cognition. Frontiers in Psychology 8:1323. Available at: doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01323.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

An unsettled debate: Key empirical and theoretical questions are still open
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

An unsettled debate: Key empirical and theoretical questions are still open
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

An unsettled debate: Key empirical and theoretical questions are still open
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *