Self and Social Identity Flashcards
Are we born as social beings?
Human beings are born social.
Human brains are only 25% of their adult volume at birth, much smaller than similar mammalian brains.
Humans are dependent on others to learn, 75% of our brain develops in the context of the real world, and specifically in a social context.
Humans are thus more dependent on experience to develop.
• Chimpanzee brains are nearly 50% their adult size at birth
• Macaque monkey brains are about 70% of their adult size at birth
Neural structures of social processes
Different neural structures are linked to different social processes. Socially specialized brain regions are important because it debunks the myth of the unitary “social brain”.
Mentalizing
Mentalizing: ToM. Explicit mentalizing is linked to the development of metacognition and is unique to humans.
Dogs, for example, learn by imitation and play. Humans also learn by those mechanisms, but are also able to learn through ostention–clear pedagogical intent.
Prefrontal cortex is crucial for meta-cognition and filtering.
bookmarked slide in class exercise
asdfa
Meltzoff (2007): What is the main claim of the article?
Social cognition is built on the skill of perceiving others “like-me”
the main claim of the article is that the distinction between self and other is the foundation of later learning. Me and not me. Not-me and not-not-me.
Social cognition is then based on the not-me-but-like-me.
Meltzoff (2007): Like me in action
Like me in action: 14 month old infants are more likely to look at and smile at the adults who are imitating the infant. Experiment 1: 1. How old are the infants? 2. What is IV? 3. What is DV? 1. 14 months 2. Adult behavior, 2 levels: Imitation of the infant or a different behavior 3. Looking time and smiles
Experiment 2:
- What is different?
- IV: Contingent behavior with a toy, either the same action or a different action
Meltzoff (2007): Like me in perception
Experiment 1:
1. How old are the infants?
2. What is IV?
3. What is DV?
1. 12, 14 and 18 months
2. Adult behavior, 2 levels: Adults turning to an object with eyes-open or eyes- closed (The eyes are related to intention, want to see if infants are responding to the eyes or the movement)
3. Head turning - whether infants looked at where the adult turned to.
They all turn their heads more when the adult’s eyes were open
Conclusion: babies can identify that eyes are used by others the same way that they themselves use eyes, the generalization of their internal experience to others is what allows them to learn.
Meltzoff (2007): Applicable to me
Applicable to me: 18 month olds are divided into groups (anger present, neutral present, anger absent) to see if they imitate adult actions.
Emotional eavesdropping–does the kid play with the toy in these different conditions?
The child plays more with the toy in the latter two groups; if the angry adult is sticking around, then the child knows that because that would make them like the scolded, they will not imitate his/her behavior.
- How old are the infants?
- What is IV?
- What is DV?
- 18 months
- IV1: Emotional eavesdropping manipulation, 3 levels:
• Angry adult reacting to another adult playing with a toy, present • Angry adult reacting to another adult playing with a toy, absent
• Neutral adult reacting to another adult playing with a toy, present - Playing with the toy
18 mos do “emotional eavesdropping”
What are the implications of Meltzoff’s theory?
The conception of self helps us to learn from others.
Lewis & Ramsay (2004)
• Addresses the developmental trajectory of identity through the relationship among pronoun usage, social play and
visual self-recognition
• 15, 18 and 21 mos
(rouge test–mirror self recognition happens at 18 months).
Basically, all these things are linked.
The moment that children see themselves in the mirror, they are more interactive players, they play WITH instead of parallel to, and they begin to adapt their pronoun use to their own perspective.
They say that it starts around 18 months, but full potential is reached at 21.
Self in a group
In group, out group bias.
Do children have this bias? Do they care about group membership?
5 year olds were assigned to random groups.
They were told stories about their group and the other group, later, their memory was tested.
The children were more likely to remember positive actions if they were performed by the in group in the story, and they were more likely to remember negative things about the out group. They are more likely overall to remember negative things.
If positive, more likely to remember in group stories. If negative, more likely to remember out group stories.
