Discrimination and Imitation of Facial Expression by Neonates

Recently, scholars from a wide variety of disciplines, using a variety of scientific techniques, have begun to study the influence of attention, facial mimicry, and social context on emotional contagion. In this paper we will review the classic evidence documenting the role of attention, facial mimicry, and feedback in sparking primitive emotional contagion. Then we will discuss the new evidence which scholars have amassed to help us better understand the role of facial mimicry in fostering contagion and the ability to "read" others' thoughts, feelings, and emotions. Finally, we will briefly speculate as to where future research might be headed.

show abstract

“…There is evidence that such automatic mimicry is innate (Field, Woodson, Greenberg, & Cohen, 1982;Termine & Izard, 1988).…”

Section: Discoveries From New Disciplines Utilizing New Technologiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

New Perspectives on Emotional Contagion: A Review of Classic and Recent Research on Facial Mimicry and Contagion

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…tongue protrusion; mouth opening) were reliably mimicked and several studies failed to replicate the results [18 -22]. In particular, few reports exist of new-born infants mimicking emotional facial expressions (but see [23]). Neonatal imitation is thus likely a specific reaction to a particular condition, which should be differentiated from general facial mimicry, and facial mimicry in reaction to emotional expressions may not be present from birth and postnatally acquired.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Automatic facial mimicry in response to dynamic emotional stimuli in five-month-old infants

Isomura

Nakano

2016

Proc. R. Soc. B.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human adults automatically mimic others' emotional expressions, which is believed to contribute to sharing emotions with others. Although this behaviour appears fundamental to social reciprocity, little is known about its developmental process. Therefore, we examined whether infants show automatic facial mimicry in response to others' emotional expressions. Facial electromyographic activity over the corrugator supercilii (brow) and zygomaticus major (cheek) of four-to five-month-old infants was measured while they viewed dynamic clips presenting audiovisual, visual and auditory emotions. The audiovisual bimodal emotion stimuli were a display of a laughing/crying facial expression with an emotionally congruent vocalization, whereas the visual/auditory unimodal emotion stimuli displayed those emotional faces/vocalizations paired with a neutral vocalization/face, respectively. Increased activation of the corrugator supercilii muscle in response to audiovisual cries and the zygomaticus major in response to audiovisual laughter were observed between 500 and 1000 ms after stimulus onset, which clearly suggests rapid facial mimicry. By contrast, both visual and auditory unimodal emotion stimuli did not activate the infants' corresponding muscles. These results revealed that automatic facial mimicry is present as early as five months of age, when multimodal emotional information is present.

show abstract

“…The cognitive developmental approach in the first half of the 20th century (1) assumed that imitation of observed actions occurs at the earliest from 10 -12 mo of age, based on learning and experience. Since the 1970s, a series of studies (2)(3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9) has confirmed that infants even as young as a few hours old can imitate proprioceptively guided behaviors. Despite these findings, neonatal imitation remained a controversial "fuzzy phenomenon" (10).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Index Finger Movement Imitation by Human Neonates: Motivation, Learning, and Left-Hand Preference

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Imitation of a fine motor movement, index finger protrusion, was examined in 39 neonates using an ethologically based objective coding system. Results confirmed that imitation of finger movements exists, and infants demonstrated "learning" as imitation developed through an incomplete imitation stage. Neonatal imitation was more frequently left-handed, an early sign of laterality in motivation to be investigated further. The existence of index finger imitation in human neonates indicates that volitional control of individuated finger movements develops much earlier than previously thought. The differential increase of index finger protrusion movements during the imitation periods suggests that this behavior is not an automatic response triggered by general arousal but instead is a true indicator of purposeful neonatal imitation. The cognitive developmental approach in the first half of the 20th century (1) assumed that imitation of observed actions occurs at the earliest from 10 -12 mo of age, based on learning and experience. Since the 1970s, a series of studies (2-9) has confirmed that infants even as young as a few hours old can imitate proprioceptively guided behaviors. Despite these findings, neonatal imitation remained a controversial "fuzzy phenomenon" (10). Several studies failed to replicate the phenomenon (11-14), and it was even regarded as artefact by some researchers (15). The confusion about neonatal imitation in part originates from the fact that most movements of neonates were regarded as unintentional until Van der Meer et al. (16) showed that newborn infants can purposefully control their arm resistance against small forces. Recent research showed that most neonatal behaviors, including neonatal reflexes, such as rooting, sucking, and imitation, are flexible and goal-directed behaviors (17). Nagy and Molnar (18,19) reported that neonates not only are able to imitate tongue protrusion gestures but also started to initiate the previously imitated gestures and to engage in long-lasting imitation/initiation "conversation" with the experimenter. Imitations and initiations were coupled with opposite heart rate changes during these dialogues and may indicate a prospective control of a new movement (heart rate increase during imitations) and an attention to an expected reply (heart rate decrease during initiations).Imitation is still lacking an ethologic, and neurophysiologic description in neonates. Why newborn infants imitate and how they can do it are still unanswered questions, although various models have been proposed. Imitation has been described as an unconditioned reflex, a circular reaction (20) or a secondary circular reaction (1), and as an innate releasing mechanism (21). It has been explained as a product of associative learning (22) or instrumental learning (23). Recent explanations include the theory of intermodal mapping (3,24) and the mirror neuron system model (25,26). Although these models successfully explain several aspects of neonatal imitation, none of them is able to describe ...

show abstract

Discrimination and Imitation of Facial Expression by Neonates

Cited by 755 publications

References 13 publications

New Perspectives on Emotional Contagion: A Review of Classic and Recent Research on Facial Mimicry and Contagion

New Perspectives on Emotional Contagion: A Review of Classic and Recent Research on Facial Mimicry and Contagion

Automatic facial mimicry in response to dynamic emotional stimuli in five-month-old infants

Index Finger Movement Imitation by Human Neonates: Motivation, Learning, and Left-Hand Preference

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About