政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/89065
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 88272/117759 (75%)
Visitors : 23393745      Online Users : 141
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/89065


    Title: 嬰兒的選擇性模仿:動作-效果整合或目的推理?
    Selective imitation in infancy: Ideomotor theory or teleological reasoning?
    Authors: 楊悅如
    Yang, Yueh Ju
    Contributors: 黃啟泰
    Huang, Chi Tai
    楊悅如
    Yang, Yueh Ju
    Keywords: 目的推理
    因果效能
    概念運動原則
    模仿
    teleological reasoning
    causal efficacy
    ideomotor theory
    imitation
    Date: 2016
    Issue Date: 2016-05-02 13:54:34 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 選擇性模仿是指嬰兒在不同情境中選擇性地模仿他人的行為,為當今發展心理學備受矚目的議題。在Gergely、Bekkering與Király(2002)著名的研究中,當實驗者的雙手自由放在桌上,示範以額頭碰盒子開燈,嬰兒偏好模仿此新奇動作;但當實驗者雙手緊抓毛毯示範相同的動作則未發現嬰兒有顯著的模仿偏好。有些研究者認嬰兒可以透過目的推理理解他人的意圖,並認為模仿是建立在對意圖的解讀之上;相反地,動作-效果整合理論則認為動作本身的執行困難度與動作-效果連結的穩定性才是影響嬰兒選擇性模仿的主因。
    為了解決兩者長久以來對於嬰兒模仿的爭議,本研究修訂Gergely等人(2002)的光盒研究派典,將焦點放在過去一直未受到重視的因果效能概念,降低示範動作的因果效能,嬰兒在實驗過程中會發現示範動作不是每次都能成功讓光盒發亮,藉此釐清目的推理論與動作-效果整合理論對嬰兒選擇性模仿的解釋適當性。實驗1的結果重製了Gergely等人(2002)的實驗結果,實驗2A與實驗2B皆發現18個月大的嬰兒在因果效能較低的情境中很少會模仿示範動作,顯示嬰兒的模仿行為較符合動作-效果整合理論的觀點,主要是受到動作執行的困難度與動作-效果聯結的穩定性的影響。
    Selective imitation refers to a phenomenon which infants differentially imitate the demonstrated action in different contexts. Recently, it has also become a popular research topic in developmental psychology. Gergely, Bekkering and Király (2002) uncovered a classic example of selective imitation. They found that infants tend to imitate the action of touching a light box with their forehead when they saw a model perform the action with her hands placed on the table, but not when her hands were restricted by a blanket. Some researchers claim that infants can interpret others’ intention through teleological reasoning, and they consider infants’ imitation is based on decoding of intentionality. Conversely, ideomotor theory argues that imitation depends on difficulty of the action execution and the stability of link between action and its effect. To address the long-standing dispute with infants’ imitation, we revised the paradigm in Gergely et al. (2002) and focused on the concept of causal efficacy which had been long ignored in the past. Infant would find that the demonstrated action, sometimes won’t turn on the light during the experimentation. In experiment 1, we replicated the results obtained in Gergely et al. (2002). Experiment 2A and 2B both found that 18-month-old infants rarely imitated the demonstrated action when the causal efficacy was relatively low. These results are closer to the ideomotor approach viewpoint of imitation, and it reveals that infants’ imitation depends on difficulty of the action execution and the stability of link between action and effect.
    Reference: Barr, R., Dowden, A., & Hayne, H. (1996). Developmental changes in deferred imitation by 6- to 24-month-old infants. Infant Behavior and Development, 19(2), 159–170. doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(96)90015-6
    Barr, R., & Hayne, H. (2003). It’s not what you know, it’s who you know: Older siblings facilitate imitation during infancy. International Journal of Early Years Education, 11(1), 7–21. doi: 10.1080/0966976032000066055
    Bauer, P. J., & Hertsgaard, L. A. (1993). Increasing steps in recall of events: Factors facilitating immediate and long-term memory in 13.5-and 16.5-month-old children. Child Development, 64(4), 1204–1223.
    Beisert, M., Zmyj, N., Liepelt, R., Jung, F., Prinz, W., & Daum, M. M. (2012). Rethinking “rational imitation” in 14-month-old infants: A perceptual distraction approach. PLoS ONE, 7(3), e32563. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0032563
    Brugger, A., Lariviere, L. A., Mumme, D. L., & Bushnell, E. W. (2007). Doing the right thing: Infants’ selection of actions to imitate from observed event sequences. Child Development, 78(3), 806–824. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01034.x
    Buttelmann, D., & Zmyj, N. (2012). Evaluating the empirical evidence for the two-stage-model of infant imitation. A commentary on Paulus, Hunnius, Vissers, and Bekkering (2011). Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00512
    Carpenter, M., Akhtar, N., & Tomasello, M. (1998). Fourteen- through 18-month-old infants differentially imitate intentional and accidental actions. Infant Behavior and Development, 21(2), 315–330. doi: 10.1016/S0163-6383(98)90009-1
    Cheng, P. W. (1997). From covariation to causation: A causal power theory. Psychological Review, 104(2), 367–405. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.104.2.367
    Chen, M. L., & Waxman, S. R. (2013). “Shall we blick?”: Novel words highlight actors’ underlying intentions for 14-month-old infants. Developmental Psychology, 49(3), 426–431. doi: 10.1037/a0029486
    Collie, R., & Hayne, H. (1999). Deferred imitation by 6-and 9-month-old infants: More evidence for declarative memory. Developmental Psychobiology, 35(2), 83–90.
    Cook, C., Goodman, N. D., & Schulz, L. E. (2011). Where science starts: Spontaneous experiments in preschoolers’ exploratory play. Cognition, 120(3), 341–349. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.03.003
    Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2007). “Obsessed with goals”: Functions and mechanisms of teleological interpretation of actions in humans. Acta Psychologica, 124(1), 60–78. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.09.007
    Elsner, B. (2007). Infants’ imitation of goal-directed actions: The role of movements and action effects. Acta Psychologica, 124(1), 44–59. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2006.09.006
    Elsner, B., & Aschersleben, G. (2003). Do I get what you get? Learning about the effects of self-performed and observed actions in infancy. Consciousness and Cognition, 12(4), 732–751. doi: 10.1016/S1053-8100(03)00073-4
    Elsner, B., Pfeifer, C., Parker, C., & Hauf, P. (2013). Infants’ perception of actions and situational constraints: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(2), 428–442. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.11.014
    Farroni, T., Johnson, M. H., Brockbank, M., & Simion, F. (2000). Infants’ use of gaze direction to cue attention: The importance of perceived motion. Visual Cognition, 7(6), 705–718. doi: 10.1080/13506280050144399
    Gergely, G., Bekkering, H., & Király, I. (2002). Developmental psychology: Rational imitation in preverbal infants. Nature, 415, 755. doi: 10.1038/415755a
    Gergely, G., & Csibra, G. (2003). Teleological reasoning in infancy: The naı̈ve theory of rational action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(7), 287–292. doi: 10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00128-1
    Gergely, G., & Csibra, G. (2006). Sylvia’s recipe: The role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of cultural knowledge. In N. J. Enfield & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of human sociality: Culture, cognition, and human interaction (pp. 229–255). Oxford, England: Berg Publisher.
    Gergely, G., Nádasdy, Z., Csibra, G., & Bíró, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56(2), 165–193. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(95)00661-H
    Gopnik, A., & Sobel, D. M. (2000). Detecting blickets: How young children use information about novel causal powers in categorization and induction. Child Development, 71(5), 1205–1222. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00224
    Gopnik, A., Sobel, D. M., Schulz, L. E., & Glymour, C. (2001). Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: Two-, three-, and four-year-olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Developmental Psychology, 37(5), 620–629. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.37.5.620
    Hauf, P., & Aschersleben, G. (2008). Action–effect anticipation in infant action control. Psychological Research, 72(2), 203–210. doi: 10.1007/s00426-006-0101-3
    Herbert, J., & Hayne, H. (2000). Memory retrieval by 18–30-month-olds: Age-related changes in representational flexibility. Developmental Psychology, 36(4), 473–484. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.36.4.473
    Horner, V., & Whiten, A. (2004). Causal knowledge and imitation/emulation switching in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and children (Homo sapiens). Animal Cognition, 8(3), 164–181. doi: 10.1007/s10071-004-0239-6
    James, W. (1998). The Principles of Psychology. New York: H. Hoit and Company.
    Király, I., Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2013). Beyond rational imitation: Learning arbitrary means actions from communicative demonstrations. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(2), 471–486. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.12.003
    Kushnir, T., & Gopnik, A. (2005). Young children infer causal strength from probabilities and interventions. Psychological Science, 16(9), 678–683. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01595.x
    Lyons, D. E., Damrosch, D. H., Lin, J. K., Macris, D. M., & Keil, F. C. (2011). The scope and limits of overimitation in the transmission of artefact culture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 366(1567), 1158–1167. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0335
    Lyons, D. E., Young, A. G., & Keil, F. C. (2007). The hidden structure of overimitation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(50), 19751–19756. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0704452104
    Marno, H., & Csibra, G. (2015). Toddlers Favor Communicatively Presented Information over Statistical Reliability in Learning about Artifacts. PLOS ONE, 10(3), e0122129. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122129
    Meltzoff, A. N. (1988a). Imitation of televised models by infants. Child Development, 59(5), 1221–1229.
    Meltzoff, A. N. (1988b). Infant imitation after a 1-week delay: Long-term memory for novel acts and multiple stimuli. Developmental Psychology, 24(4), 470–476. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.24.4.470
    Meltzoff, A. N. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: Re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Developmental Psychology, 31(5), 838–850. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.31.5.838
    Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science, 198(4312), 75–78.
    Meltzoff, A. N., & Moore, M. K. (1983). Newborn infants imitate adult facial gestures. Child Development, 702–709.
    Nagell, K., Olguin, R. S., & Tomasello, M. (1993). Processes of social learning in the tool use of chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107(2), 174–186. doi: 10.1037/0735-7036.107.2.174
    Nielsen, M. (2006). Copying actions and copying outcomes: Social learning through the second year. Developmental Psychology, 42(3), 555–565. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.42.3.555
    Over, H., & Carpenter, M. (2012). Putting the social into social learning: Explaining both selectivity and fidelity in children’s copying behavior. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126(2), 182–192. doi: 10.1037/a0024555
    Paulus, M. (2014). How and why do infants imitate? An ideomotor approach to social and imitative learning in infancy (and beyond). Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(5), 1139–1156. doi: 10.3758/s13423-014-0598-1
    Paulus, M., Hunnius, S., & Bekkering, H. (2013). Examining functional mechanisms of imitative learning in infancy: Does teleological reasoning affect infants’ imitation beyond motor resonance? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116(2), 487–498. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.009
    Paulus, M., Hunnius, S., Vissers, M., & Bekkering, H. (2011a). Bridging the gap between the other and me: The functional role of motor resonance and action effects in infants’ imitation. Developmental Science, 14(4), 901–910. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2011.01040.x
    Paulus, M., Hunnius, S., Vissers, M., & Bekkering, H. (2011b). Imitation in infancy: Rational or motor resonance? Child Development, 82(4), 1047–1057. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2011.01610.x
    Piaget, J. (1952).The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York: International Universities Press.
    Piaget, J. (1962). Play dreams and imitation in childhood. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
    Pinkham, A. M., & Jaswal, V. K. (2011). Watch and learn? Infants privilege efficiency over pedagogy during imitative learning. Infancy, 16(5), 535–544. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7078.2010.00059.x
    Prinz, W. (1997). Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 9(2), 129–154. doi: 10.1080/713752551
    Schulz, L. E., Hooppell, C., & Jenkins, A. C. (2008). Judicious imitation: Children differentially imitate deterministically and probabilistically effective actions. Child Development, 79(2), 395–410. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01132.x
    Schulz, L. E., & Sommerville, J. (2006). God does not play dice: Causal determinism and preschoolers’ causal inferences. Child Development, 77(2), 427–442. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2006.00880.x
    Schwier, C., van Maanen, C., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Rational imitation in 12-month-old infants. Infancy, 10(3), 303–311. doi: 10.1207/s15327078in1003_6
    Valenza, E., Simion, F., Cassia, V. M., & Umiltà, C. (1996). Face preference at birth. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22(4), 892–903. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.22.4.892
    Vinter, A. (1986). The role of movement in eliciting early imitations. Child Development, 66–71.
    Waismeyer, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Gopnik, A. (2015). Causal learning from probabilistic events in 24-month-olds: An action measure. Developmental Science, 18(1), 175–182. doi: 10.1111/desc.12208
    Wimmer, H., & Perner, J. (1983). Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. Cognition, 13(1), 103–128. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5
    Wohlschläger, A., Gattis, M., & Bekkering, H. (2003). Action generation and action perception in imitation: an instance of the ideomotor principle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 358(1431), 501–515. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2002.1257
    Woodward, A. L. (1998). Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor’s reach. Cognition, 69(1), 1–34. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00058-4
    Wu, Y., Muentener, P., & Schulz, L. E. (2013). The invisible hand: Toddlers infer hidden agents when events occur probabilistically. In M. Knauff, M. Pauen, N. Sebanz, & I. Wachsmuth (Eds.), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 3807–3810). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    Zmyj, N., Daum, M. M., & Aschersleben, G. (2009). The development of rational imitation in 9- and 12-month-old infants. Infancy, 14(1), 131–141. doi: 10.1080/15250000802569884
    Zmyj, N., & Buttelmann, D. (2014). An integrative model of rational imitation in infancy. Infant Behavior and Development, 37(1), 21–28. doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2013.10.001
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    心理學系
    102752007
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0102752007
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Psychology] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File SizeFormat
    200701.pdf5758KbAdobe PDF412View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏,無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用,惟仍請適度,合理使用本網站之內容,以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用,則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    2.本網站之製作,已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益,如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者,請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw),維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback