Main findings
The specific objectives of the project could be reached by answering
the following questions:
1) What are the evolutionary origins of the potential to imitate?
and
2) What types of experience enhance the potential for imitation?
The EDICI project has shown that the capacity to imitate is not
something that is innate—present or absent in a creature at
birth. Rather, the ability to imitate is something that an individual
develops as a consequence of observing their own actions and crucially,
engaging in social interaction with others. In the animal kingdom,
humans are the most gifted imitators, not because we are intrinsically
smarter than other animals, but because our culture-soaked world
provides rich sources of the right kind of experience for the development
of imitation. However, our work has also shown that other animals,
including monkeys and dogs, can also imitate when they receive this
kind of sensorimotor experience. Furthermore, they sometimes imitate
with remarkable precision, and sometimes highly selectively, taking
the specific circumstances of the demonstration into account.
3) How does intentional control of imitation change in the
course of human development? and
4) Do the neuro-cognitive mechanisms that distinguish self from
others play a key role in intentional control of human imitative
performance?
It is now widely acknowledged that the observation of an action
leads to an activation of a corresponding motor representation in
the observer (shared representations). Such shared representations
form the basis for our ability to imitate. However, one fundamental
question regarding such shared representations is how we can avoid
automatic imitation and how we can distinguish self-generated from
externally triggered motor representations. Our research identified
the brain regions that are involved in the control of shared representations.
We could show that the posterior superior temporal sulcus and the
anterior fronto-median cortex are critical for self/other distinction
and avoiding imitative response tendencies. Furthermore, our research
provides a new perspective on the question how shared representations
are related to other social cognitive skills such as mentalizing.
In contrast to the dominant view that tries to link shared representations
directly to mentalizing abilities, we rather assume that it the
control of shared representations that forms the basis for mentalizing.
5) Is intentional control of imitative performance uniquely
human?
Whether the intentional control of imitation is uniquely human
is still an open question. However, the dominant role of the prefrontal
cortex in the control of imitative behaviour and the involvement
of prefrontal brain regions in higher order social cognitive skills
such as mentalizing suggests that humans have developed extraordinary
skills in the control of imitation. Our results have furthermore
demonstrated that human imitative learning is a unique mechanism
of naïve pedagogy that facilitates fast and efficient cultural
knowledge transfer. Unlike imitation in other species, human imitative
learning is inferential, context-sensitive, selective, and it is
being guided by ostensive social cuing that convey the overt communicative
intentions of others.
Clinical relevance
Our results have implications of two kinds with respect to the
assistance of people with impaired imitative ability. First, they
suggest that remedial programmes designed to overcome this impairment
specifically (rather than to treat its sequelae) are most likely
to be successful when they are based on sensorimotor training. Second,
our results clarify some conceptual issues with clinical relevance.
For example, it was assumed that imitation forms the basis for our
ability to understand other peoples behavior. However, our results
suggest that it is rather the control of imitative behavior that
shows a functional overlap with the ability to mentalize. This opens
a different perspective on our understanding of developmental disorders
such as autism. While research has recently focused on imitative
deficits in this patient group we would rather suggest to look at
deficits in the control of shared representations. This would also
mean that potential intervention programs should focus on improving
the ability for self/other distinction rather than imitative abilities.
|