Generalization of deferred imitation during the first year of life

Learmonth, Amy E.; Lamberth, Rebecca; Rovee‐Collier, Carolyn

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2004.04.004

Cited by 85 publications

(112 citation statements)

References 80 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Under controlled experimental conditions, infants as young as 6 and 9 months of age have been shown to exhibit deferred imitation of actions demonstrated with objects over a 24-h delay Collie and Hayne, 1999;Learmonth et al, 2004;Meltzoff, 1988). When the demonstrated actions do not involve objects, imitation is seen even earlier.…”

Section: Imitation and Cognitive Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Exploring memory in infancy: deferred imitation and the development of declarative memory

Jones

Herbert

2006

Inf. Child Develop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Imitation and Cognitive Developmentmentioning

confidence: 98%

Exploring memory in infancy: deferred imitation and the development of declarative memory

Jones

Herbert

2006

Inf. Child Develop.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Using the same deferred imitation task, Learmonth, Lamberth and Rovee-Collier (2004) demonstrated the puppet actions to 6-and 9-month old infants while they sat on a distinctive colored mat and then changed either the mat, the room in the house, or both the mat and the room prior to the test. Both 6-and 9-month olds were able to imitate the actions after a 24-hour delay if the test occurred either on a different mat or in a different room of their house.…”

Section: Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Both 6-and 9-month olds were able to imitate the actions after a 24-hour delay if the test occurred either on a different mat or in a different room of their house. Only 9-month olds exhibited retention if both the mat and the room in their house were changed at the time of the test (Learmonth et al, 2004). As is illustrated in Figure 6, by 12-months of age, infants tested on the puppet task are able to cope with large changes in the retrieval cues available at the test .…”

Section: Retrievalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accounting for change in declarative memory: A cognitive neuroscience perspective

Richmond

Nelson

2007

Developmental Review

152

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The medial temporal lobe memory system matures relatively early and supports rudimentary declarative memory in young infants. There is considerable development, however, in the memory processes that underlie declarative memory performance during infancy. Here we consider agerelated changes in encoding, retention, and retrieval in the context of current knowledge about the brain systems that may underlie these memory processes. While changes in infants' encoding may be attributed to rapid myelination during the first year of life, improvements in long-term retention and flexible retrieval are likely due to the prolonged development of the dentate gyrus. Future studies combining measures of brain and behavior are critical in improving our understanding of how brain development drives memory development during infancy and early childhood.

show abstract

“…Tests of deferred imitation under these strict conditions have been proposed to measure preverbal representational ability (Meltzoff & Moore, 1998;Piaget, 1952), recall memory (Bauer, Wiebe, Carver, Waters, & Nelson, 2003;Carver & Bauer, 2001;Courage, Howe, & Squires, 2004;Gross, Hayne, Herbert, & Sowerby, 2001;Meltzoff, 1995), and individual differences (Heimann & Meltzoff, 1996). Additionally, by means of this procedure it has been shown that infants can also access memory of actions presented in one context and imitate those actions in another context (Barnat, Klein, & Meltzoff, 1996;Klein & Meltzoff, 1999;Learmonth, Lamberth, & Rovee-Collier, 2004). …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Infant recall memory and communication predicts later cognitive development

Strid

Tjus

Smith

et al. 2006

Infant Behavior and Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This longitudinal study investigates the relation between recall memory and communication in infancy and later cognitive development. Twenty-six typically developing Swedish children were tested during infancy for deferred imitation (memory), joint attention (JA), and requesting (nonverbal communication); they also were tested during childhood for language and cognitive competence. Results showed that infants with low performance on both deferred imitation at 9 months and joint attention at 14 months obtained a significantly lower score on a test of cognitive abilities at 4 years of age. This long-term prediction from preverbal infancy to childhood cognition is of interest both to developmental theory and to practice. Keywords Recall memory; Deferred imitation; Joint attention; Pre-verbal communication; Cognitive development; PredictionThe present study explores whether early indices of declarative memory and nonverbal communication skills predict performance later in childhood. In a previous study, Heimann et al. (2006) documented a relationship between recall memory at 9 months (deferred imitation), communication skills at 14 months (joint attention (JA)), and gestural communication at 14 months. The current study investigates whether a similar relationship exists between these infant skills and linguistic/cognitive performance measured long after the infancy period-at 4 years of age.Theories of memory development originally proposed at least two major subsystems (e.g. Schacter & Moscovitch, 1984)-a procedural system available from birth and a declarative system that develops later in childhood. However, new test paradigms, such as deferred imitation, reveal that infants have some sort of nonverbal declarative memory already at 6-9 months, and possibly earlier (Barr, Dowden, & Hayne, 1996;Collie & Hayne, 1999;Hayne, Boniface, & Barr, 2000;Heimann & Nilheim, 2004;Meltzoff, 1988Meltzoff, , 1995Meltzoff & Moore, 1998 In the deferred imitation procedure developed by Meltzoff (1988), children are briefly exposed to a target action; the object is then removed without letting the participants touch or play with it. This means that in order to be successful in a deferred imitation task, children need to form an internal representation of the adult's act and store that representation in memory. Because the participants are not allowed to handle the object prior to the delay, they cannot rely on a previously executed motor pattern in order to remember the action. After a delay, the object is re-presented and the children have the opportunity to produce the target action without any verbal cues. Tests of deferred imitation under these strict conditions have been proposed to measure preverbal representational ability (Meltzoff & Moore, 1998;Piaget, 1952), recall memory (Bauer, Wiebe, Carver, Waters, & Nelson, 2003;Carver & Bauer, 2001;Courage, Howe, & Squires, 2004;Gross, Hayne, Herbert, & Sowerby, 2001;Meltzoff, 1995), and individual differences (Heimann & Meltzoff, 1996). Additionally, by means of this procedure...

show abstract

Generalization of deferred imitation during the first year of life

Cited by 85 publications

References 80 publications

Exploring memory in infancy: deferred imitation and the development of declarative memory

Exploring memory in infancy: deferred imitation and the development of declarative memory

Accounting for change in declarative memory: A cognitive neuroscience perspective

Infant recall memory and communication predicts later cognitive development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About