understanding intentions

understanding intentions

1. How do children recognise other's intention? Do they only imitate the adults or they really understand what is their intention?

2. Olson (1988)-> argued that until the age of 4 actions cannot be linked with intentions

   • Astington (1991)--> understanding incomplete actions in terms of intentions should not be possible until the age of 4
     • Incomplete actions (Meltzgoff, 1995)
       • investigated whether a 18-month-old infants re-enact what an adult actually did or what the adult intended to so
         • infants watch an adults who tried, but failed, to perform certain target acts (e.g. dropping beads into a cup and missing)
           • When handed the apparatus, infant will perform the intended action correctly
         • Johnson et al.(2001) replicated and found the same results in 15 month old
     • Rational Imitation: infants' not only understand goals but also the rational basis for that choice of action
       • => goal directed actions is a selective and interpretive process

3. Rationality

   • Attributing goals to an action is not about having experienced the action oneself or about the familiarity of actions observed in others. it is about 'rationality'

4. Some of earliest evidence of infants understanding others' actions as being intentional comes from research that has looked at reaching and grasping behaviour (Woodward, 2009)

   • Hamlin et al. (2008): 7mth-old infants observed an actor perform on one of two toys to see whether they would then choose 'intended' toy
     • , we tested whether 7-month-old infants would selectively imitate the goal-relevant aspects of an observed action. Infants saw an experimenter perform an action on one of two small toys and then were given the opportunity to act on the toys. Infants viewed actions that were either goal-directed or goal-ambiguous, and that represented either completed or uncompleted goals. Infants reproduced the goal of the experimenter only in those cases where the action was goal-directed, in both the complete and incomplete goal conditions. These results provide the first evidence that infants as young as 7 months of age selectively imitate actions based on their goal-directedness, and that they are able to analyze the goals of even uncompleted actions. Even during the first year of life, infants’ sensitivity to goal-directed action is expressed not only in their responses in visual habituation procedures, but also in their overt actions.

5. Personal sum up with key names and views

   • The traditional/initial/old model or view or theory about 'understanding intention' when in infancy
     • Oslon (1988) argued that unti the age of 4 there is no link between actions and intentions
     • Astington (1991) added that understanding intentions until that age is impossible
     • However, Meltzgoff (1995) investigated whether 18-month-old infants would re-enact what an adult tried to do, but failed, to complete the action
       • The infants watched the adult failing, however, when their turn arrived to perform the same action; they did understood the intention and perfrom it until achieve the goal.
         • Johnson (2001) has found even more significant results. He observed this behaviour at 15-month-old infant
   • Infants are helping others to complete their intentions (Warneken & Tomasello, 2006, 2009): from 18-month-old understanding others; intentions and help them complete when in need
     • Intentional vs Accidental, Neccessary, Unable: 1. Carpenter et al. (1998:) ; 2. Schwier et al (2006); 3.Benhe et al. (2005)
       • Carpenter (1998): 14-15- months -old infant and discovered that the infants were completing twice as many intentional actions t of an adut model, than accidentalones.
       • Schwier (2006): 12-month-old would imitate odd actions only if they are intentional and not accidental (putting dog inside the house through chimney - door locked or open)
       • Benhe et al. (2005): 9, 12 and 18 month old (but not 6) get impatient when adults were not passing over the toy intentionally rather because they failled it (dropped it)
   • Rational Imitation: Infants could understand the rational basis for that choice of action, not only the goal
     • Gegerly et al. (2002) adult and light box; Schwier et al. (2006): 12-month-old-> dog and the house
     • Dishabituation is way of responding to old stimuli as it if were new. There are two schools of thought on dishabituation: (1) that it is a process of habituation in reverse and (2) that it is sensitization of a previously habituated response to a stimulus.
   • 'Parsing' dynamic actions
     • Baldwin and Baird (2001) did a study with 10-11 month old infant: they saw a video with a women who observed towel on the floor, she reaches and grasps it. After, the infants familiarised with it, they were presented with 2 different versions with still-framed pauses at 'completion points' or at 'interruption points'. The infant too loonger looks at interruption--> sensistivity to the structure of the intentional action
   • Reaching/ Grasping--> most of the evidence on understanding intention is based on reaching an grasping behaviours (Woodward, 2009)
     • Hamlin et al. (2008): 7-month-old infants ibserved an actor pefrom on one of two toys to see wheter they would then choose 'intended' toy : Goal-drected vs goal-ambiguous
     • Anticipating other's actions:
       • Motor ability and anticipation of other's intentions: being picked up:one og the earliest actions infants experience