Lecture 4 Imitation And Action Understanding Flashcards
How do we Map perceptually opaque actions
Requires neuro cognitive mechanism that relates the seen to the unfelt and the felt to the unseen
Define perceptually transparent actions
Actions where can see yourself doing it
What are perceptually opaque actions
Actions that aren’t a guided by sensory info about degree of similarity between the model and the observer - can’t see if doing well
Evolutionary reasoning for imitation
Innate mechanism that matches observed action to the one executed
Environmental reason for imitation
Learn to match our expressions
describe meltzoff and moore 1977 infant imitation
Presented infants with 3 facial expressions - mouth widening, lip pursing and tongue protrusion and control
found infants successfully imitated all actions with no confusing mapping actions between similar modalities
What is imitation
thought to be an innate mapping mechanism of Social behaviours of actions onto own body from another’s
the act of copying anothers behaviour
define mimicry
imitation across species
protective mechanism
difference between human imitation compared to other species
all animals imitate
BUT humans tend to over imitate - imitate both the behaviourally relevant and irrelevant actions that they see performed
describe hamer and whiten 2005 human over imitation
imitation in 3 y/o infants and chimps observing a human model
performing actions behind an opaqe or transparent box
opaque - cant see the inner workings
transparent - can see how actions impact behind box/outcome
chimps only imitate all actions when opaque - dont know which actions are necessary
BUT humans also imitate when transparent - even when obviously not relevant to the outcome
Meltzoff and moore 1997 original imitation model
facial imitationbased on active intermodal mapping
use match to target process using proprioceptive feedback to determine correct imitaition of expression
1- visual perception
2- supramodal representation (equivalence detector)
3- infant motor acts + proprioceptive info (feedback to equivalence detector)
detailed Melzoff and moore AIM model ‘active intermodal mapping’
1 - perceptual system - info from worlds (exteroceptive) and body (somatosensory field)
2- supramodal representational system - specifies equivalence of observed and performed action - organ relation between target and infant
3- if mismatch then to Action Systen which co ord movements, forms new end goal and execute new action - feedback to body for change in config
through repetitive body play ‘body babbling’, infants learn relationships between self-generated movement and the organ relations BUT the mechanism that maps movements onto self is mature from birth.
What does the AIM model overall suggest
infants have a good cognitive mechanism that allows them to compute imitative errors effectively and perform novel behaviours with a high level of accuracy
anisfeld 1996 critique of melzoff and moore
eval infant imitation studies
support only tongue protrusion imitation and no other actions
measures used not sensitive enough
+ m&m experimenter bias - readminister modelling period when trying to get attention means more likely to coincide similar actions
jones 1996 critique of m&m
tongue protrusions are not driven by an innate imitative mathcing mechanism but is driven by infant liking/interest expression which is usually expressed in the face of novel stimui
infants show tongue protrusion to wide variety of sitmuli ie lights as well as novel facial expressions
when learn reaching behaviours, tongue protrusions decline