政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/67307
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 114205/145239 (79%)
Visitors : 52617129      Online Users : 793
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
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/67307


    Title: 自閉症類兒童模仿能力之研究
    A Study of Imitative Performance in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorders
    Authors: 李承哲
    Contributors: 黃啟泰
    姜忠信
    李承哲
    Keywords: 模仿
    目標
    無關動作
    有關動作
    無意義物體動作
    自閉症類疾患
    imitation
    goal
    unrelated action
    related action
    meaningless object movement
    autistic spectrum disorders
    Date: 2013
    Issue Date: 2014-07-07 11:09:00 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: 過去累積許多關於自閉症類兒童模仿的研究；其中，Lyons等人（2011）提出自動化因果編錄（ACE）是相當重要的理論。ACE認為自閉症類兒童之所以重演缺乏目標的動作，是因為部件相連作業呈現的外觀連續性，令自閉症類兒童較易將缺乏目標的動作視為導致目標動作前的必要動作。於是本研究的目的在於驗證自閉症類兒童的動作重演表現是否符合自動化因果編錄理論的預測：當部件分離時，自閉症類兒童無法推論缺乏目標的動作是否有出現的必要，於是動作重演將減少。本研究邀請24名自閉症類兒童，以及配對心理年齡30個月大的21名發展遲緩兒童與24名一般發展兒童，將部件相連與部件分離作業當作組內的操弄變項，並另外施測無意義物體動作作業，將帶有目標的有關動作、缺乏目標的無關動作與無意義物體動作三者當作依變項，比較三組兒童的動作重演表現。結果發現：一、自閉症類兒童在有關動作前重演的無關動作並沒有在部件分離作業中較少，此結果不支持ACE理論。二、自閉症類兒童能夠重演無關動作，不易重演無意義物體動作，或許是因為自閉症類兒童可以重演物體本身提供的動作屬性，然而抑制已形成的習慣有困難。三、自閉症類兒童重演有關動作與無意義物體動作的表現較另二組差，兩者正相關，而無關動作的重演表現與另二組無異，也許是因為無意義物體動作與有關動作的相似度較高，皆可被視為示範動作中的主要目標動作，而無關動作較屬於次要的動作；換句話說，或許自閉症類兒童的困難在於重演主要目標的動作，但是重演次要動作的困難則不明顯。整體而言，本研究對於早期自閉症類兒童的社會學習障礙提出可能的觀點。
    Research showed distinctive imitative pattern in children with autistic spectrum disorders (ASDs), and one of the possible explanations is automatic causal encoding (ACE; Lyons et al, 2011). In ACE’s view, connective parts of task facilitate ASDs to copy actions without goals, which are seen as necessary to occur before copying actions with goals. Present research is to examine ACE theory in ASDs: when parts of the task separate, ASDs cannot infer the necessity of actions with goals to copy, and behaviors copying reduce. 69 children at mental age 30 months (24 ASDs, 21 developmental delay, and 24 normal development) enrolled our experiment, which was composed of connective parts of task, separate parts of task, and meaningless object movement task, with related actions (related to goal), unrelated actions(unrelated to goal), and meaningless object movements served as dependent variables. Several findings arose. First, copying behaviors of unrelated actions prior to related actions did not decline in separate parts of task, which disapprove ACE theory. Second, irrelevant actions copying was unimpaired in ASDs, while meaningless object movements copying seemed difficult for ASDs, which may due to ASDs’ ability to copy object properties of actions, but inability to inhibit habituated routines. Third, ASDs copied related actions and meaningless object movements less than the other groups, and the two actions were positively correlated, while unrelated actions copying showed no difficulty. This demonstrates that related actions and meaningless object movements are both actions with primary goals, while unrelated actions are subordinate actions; namely, one possible difficulty for ASDs to copy is actions with primary goal, while copying subordinate actions seems unimpaired. In sum, present research provides perspectives on ASDs’ impairments with social learning.
    Reference: Aldridge, M. A., Stone, K. R., Sweeney, M. H., & Bower, T. G. R. (2000). Preverbal children with autism understand the intentions of others. Developmental Science, 3, 294–301.
    American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and Statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed, text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
    Baker, C. L., Saxe, R., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2009). Action understanding as inverse planning. Cognition, 113, 329–349.
    Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
    Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Lemery, C. R., & Mullett, J. (1986). “I show how you feel.” Motor mimicry as a communicative act. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 322-329.
    Bekkering, H., Wohlschläger, A., & Gattis, M. (2000). Imitation of gestures in children is goal-directed. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 153–164.
    Berument, S. K., Rutter, M., Lord, C., Pickels, A., & Bailey, A. (1999). Autism screening questionnaire: Diagnostic validity. British Journal of Psychiatry, 175, 444-451.
    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, 806–824.
    Bugnyar, T. & Huber, L. (1997). Push or pull: An experimental study on imitation in marmosets. Animal Behaviour, 54, 817-831.
    Byrne, R. W. (1994). The evolution of intelligence. In P. J. B. Slater & T. R. Halliday (Eds.), Behavior and Evolution (pp. 223-265). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Call, J., Carpenter, M. & Tomasello, M. (2005). Copying results and copying actions in the process of social learning: Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens). Animal Cognition, 8, 151-163.
    Carpenter, M., Uebel, J., & Tomasello, M. (2013). Being mimicked increases prosocial behavior in 18-month-old infants. Child Development, 84, 1511-1518.
    Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2014). Prevalence of autism spectrum disorder among children aged 8 years – Autism and developmental disabilities monitoring network, 11 sites, United States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report Surveillance Summaries, 63, 1-21.
    Charman, T., Baron-Cohen, S., Swettenham, J., Baird, G., Cox, A., & Drew, A. (2000). Testing joint attention, imitation, and play as infancy precursors to language and theory of mind. Cognitive Development, 15, 481-498.
    Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The Chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893-910.
    Chevallier, C., Kohls,G. Troiani, V., Brodki, E. S., & Schultz, R. T. (2012). The social motivation theory of autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 231-239.
    Corsello, C., Hus, V., Pickels, A., Risi, S., Cook, E. H., & Leventhal, B. L., et al. (2007). Between a ROC and a hard place: Decision making and making decisions about using the SCQ. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 932-940.
    Custance, D. M., Whiten, A. & Fredman, T. (1999). Social learning of artificial fruit processing in capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Journal of comparative Psychology, 113, 13-23.
    Dawson, B. V., & Foss, B. M. (1965). Observational learning in budgerigars. Animal Behavior, 13, 470-474.
    Dewey, D., Cantell, M., & Crawford, S. (2007). Motor and gestural performance in children with autism spectrum disorders, developmental coordination disorder, and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 246-256.
    Dowell, L. R., Mahone, E. M., & Mostofsky, S. H. (2009). Associations of postural knowledge and basic motor skill with dyspraxia in autism: Implication for abnormalities in distributed connectivity and motor learning. Neuropsychology, 23, 563-570.
    Galef, B. G., Manzig, L. A. & Field, R. M. (1986). Imitation learning in budgerigars: Dawson and Foss (1965) revisited. Behavioural Processes, 13, 191-202.
    Gergely, G. & Csibra, G. (2006). Sylvia’s recipe: The role of imitation and pedagogy in the transmission of human culture. In N. J. Enfield & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Roots of Human Sociality: Culture, Cognition, and Human Interaction (pp. 229-255). Oxford: Berg Publishers.
    Gergely, G., Nadasdy, Z., Csibra, G., & Biro, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition, 56, 165-193.
    Gleissner, B., Meltzoff, A. N., & Bekkering, H. (2000). Children’s coding of human action: cognitive factors influencing imitation in 3-year-olds. Developmental Science, 3, 405–414.
    Hamilton, A. F. (2008). Emulation and mimicry for social interaction: A theoretical approach to imitation in autism. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 101–115.
    Hamilton, A. F. (2009). Research review: Goals, intentions and mental states: challenges for theories of autism. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50, 881-892.
    Hammes, J. G., & Langdell, T. (1981). Precursors of symbol formation and childhood autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorder, 11, 331–346.
    Heyes, C. M., & Saggerson, A. (2002). Testing for imitative and nonimitative social learning in the budgerigar using a two-object/two-action test. Animal Behavior, 64, 851–859.
    Hopper, L. M. (2010). Ghost experiments and the dissection of social learning in humans and animals. Biological Reviews, 85, 685-701.
    Horner, V., & Whiten, A. (2005). Causal knowledge and imitation/emulation switching in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and children (Homo sapiens). Animal Cognition, 8, 164-181.
    Huang, C. T. & Charman, T. (2005). Gradations of emulation learning in infants’ imitation of actions on objects. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 92, 276-302.
    Huang, C. T., Heyes, C. M., & Charman, T. (2002). Infants’ behavioral re-enactment of failed attempts: Exploring the roles of emulation learning, stimulus enhancement, and understanding of intentions. Developmental Psychology, 38, 840–855.
    Huang, C. T. (2012). Outcome-based observational learning in human infants. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126, 139-149.
    Huang, C. T. (2013). Contexts of a person’s prior intentions facilitate observational learning in 2.5-year-old children. Cognitive Development, 28, 374-385.
    Huber, L., Range, F., Voelkl, B., Szucsich, A., Viranyi, Z. & Miklosi, A. (2009). The evolution of imitation: What do the capacities of non-human animals tell us about the mechanisms of imitation? Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 2299-2309.
    Hume, D. (1739). A treatise of human nature.
    Kenward, B., Karlsson, M. & Persson, J. (2010). Over-imitation is better explained by norm learning than by distorted causal learning. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 278, 1239-1246.
    Klein, E. D. & Zentall, T. R. (2003). Imitation and affordance learning by pigeons (Columbia livia). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 117, 414-419.
    Lakin, J. L., Jefferis, V. E., Cheng, C, M., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). The Chameleon effect as social glue: Evidence for the evolutionary significance of nonconscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27, 145-162.
    Laland, K. N., Atton, N. & Webster, M. M. (2011). From fish to fashion: Experimental and theoretical insights into the evolution of culture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366, 958-968.
    Lord, C., Rutter, M., DiLavore, P. C., & Risi, S. (1999). Autism Diagnostic Observation Schedule (ADOS). LA: WPS.
    Lyons, D. E. (2009). The Rational Continuum of Human Imitation. Mirror Neuron Systems, 2, 77-103.
    Lyons, D. E., Damrosch, D. H., Lin, J.,K., Simeone, D. M., & Keil, F. C. (2011). The scope and limits of over-imitation in the transmission of artifact culture. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 366, 1158-1167.
    Lyons, D. E., Young, A. G. & Keil, F. C. (2007). The hidden structure of overimitation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104, 19751–19756.
    McGuigan, N., Whiten, A., Flynn, E. F., & Horner, V. (2007). Imitation of causally necessary versus unnecessary tool use by 3- and 5-year-old children. Cognitive Development, 22, 356-364.
    McGuigan, N. & Whien, A. (2009). Emulation and ‘overemulation’ in the social learning of causally opaque versus causally transparent tool use by 23- and 30-month-olds. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 367-381.
    McGuigan, N., Makinson, J., & Whiten, A. (2011). From over-imitation to super-copying: Adults imitate causally irrelevant aspects of tool use with higher fidelity than young children. British Journal of Psychology, 102, 1-18.
    Meltzoff, A. N. (1985). Immediate and deferred imitation in fourteen- and twenty-four-month-old infants. Child Development, 56, 62-72.
    Meltzoff, A. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: Reenactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Developmental Psychology, 31, 838-850.
    Mullen, E. (1995). Mullen Scales of Early Learning. Cranston, RI: T.O.T.A.L. Child, Inc.
    Nagell, K., Olguin, R. S. & Tomasello, M. (1993). Processes of social learning in the tool use of chimpanzees (Pantroglodytes) and human children (Homo sapiens). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 107, 174–186.
    Nielsen, M. (2006). Copying actions and copying outcomes: Social learning through the second year. Developmental Psychology, 42, 555-565.
    Neilsen, M. & Blank, C. (2011). Imitation in Young Children: When who gets copied is more important than what gets copied. Developmental Psychology, 47, 1050-1053.
    Nielsen, M., & Hudry, K. (2010). Over-imitation in children with autism and Down syndrome. Australian Journal of Psychology, 62, 67-74.
    Nielsn, M., Moore, C., & Mohamedally, J. (2012). Young children overimitate in third-party contexts. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 112, 73-83.
    Nielsen, M., & Tomaselli, K. (2009). Over-imitation in the kalahari desert and the origins of human cultural cognition. Psychological Science, 21, 730-736.
    Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: Norton.
    Piaget, J. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. New York: Basic.
    Rogers, S. J., Hepburn, S. L., Stackhouse, T, & Wehner, E. (2003). Imitation performance in toddlers with autism and those with other developmental disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 44, 763-781.
    Royeurs, H., Van Oost, P., & Bothuyne, S. (1998). Immediate imitation and joint attention in young children with autism. Developmental Psychopathology, 10, 441–450.
    Rutter, M., LeCouteur, A., & Lord, C. (2003). Autism Diagnostic Interview-Revised (ADI-R-WPS). Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
    Schachner, A. & Carey, S. (2013). Reasoning about ‘irrational’ actions: When intentional movements cannot be explained , the movements themselves as seen as the goal. Cognition, 129, 309-327.
    Scott-Van Zeeland, A. A., Dapretto, M., Ghahremani, D.G., Poldrack, R.A., & Bookheimer, S.Y. (2010). Reward processing in autism. Autism Research, 3, 53–67.
    Sigman, M., & Ungerer, J. A. (1984). Cognitive and language skills in autistic, mentally retarded and normal children. Developmental Psychology, 20, 293–302.
    Sparrow, S.S., Cicchetti, D.V., & Balla, D.A. (2005). Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scales: Second Edition (Vineland II), Survey Interview Form/Caregiver Rating Form., Livonia, MN: Pearson Assessments.
    Stone, W. L., Ousley, O. Y., & Littleford, C. D. (1997). Motor imitation in Young Children with autism: What’s the object? Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 25, 475-485.
    Thorpe, W. H. (1963). Learning and instinct in animals. London, UK: Methuen.
    Tolman, C. W. (1964). Social facilitation pf feeding behavior in the domestic chick. Animal Behaviour, 12, 245-251.
    Tomasello, M. (1990). Cultural transmission in the tool use and communicatory signaling of chimpanzees? In ‘Language’ and intelligence in monkeys and apes: Comparative developmental perspectives (eds S. T. Parker & K. Gibson), pp.274-311. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
    Tomasello, M. (1996). Do apes ape? In Social learning in animals: the roots of culture (eds C. M. Heyes & B. G. Galef), pp. 319-346. London, UK: Academic Press.
    Tomasello, M., Davis-Dasilva, M., Camak, L. & Bard, K. (1987). Observational learning of tool-use by young chimpanzees. Human Evolution, 2, 175-183.
    van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Kawakami, K., & van Knippenberg, A. (2004). Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 15, 71-74.
    Whiten, A., Custance, D. M., Gomez, J.-C., Teixidor, P. & Bard, K. A. (1996). Imitative learning of artificial fruit processing in children (Homo sapiens) and chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Journal of Comparative Psychology, 110, 3–14.
    Whiten, A., Horner, V. & de Waal, F. B. M. (2005) Conformity to cultural norms of tool use in chimpanzees. Nature, 437, 737-740.
    Whiten, A. Horner, V., Litchfield, C. A. & Marshall-Pescii, S. (2004). How do apes ape? Learning & Behavior, 32, 36-52.
    Whiten, A., McGuigan, N., Marshall-Pescini, S. & Hopper, L. M. (2009). Emulation, imitation, over-imitation, and the scope of culture for child and chimpanzee. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 2417-2428.
    WHO. (1993). The ICD-10 classification of mental and behavioral disorders: diagnostic criteria for research. Geneva: World Health Organization.
    Williams, J. H., Whiten, A., & Singh, T. (2004). A systematic review of action imitation in autistic spectrum disorder. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 34, 285-299.
    Wood, D. (1989). Social interaction as tutoring. In M. H. Bornstein & J. S. Bruner (Eds.), Interaction in human development (pp. 59-80). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Woodward, A. (1998). Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor’s reach. Cognition, 69, 1-34.
    Wu, C. C., Chiang, C. H., & Hou, Y. M. (2011). A two time point study of imitative abilities in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 24, 29-49.
    Zachor, D. A., Inanit, T., & Itzchak. (2010). Autism severity and motor abilities correlates of imitation situations in children with autism spectrum disorders. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 4, 438-443.
    Zajonc, R. B. (1965). Social facilitation. Science, 149, 269-274.
    Zentall, T. R. (2001). Imitation in animals: evidence, function, and mechanisms. Cybernetics and Systems, 32, 53-96.
    Zentall, T. & Akins, C. (2001). Imiation in animals: evidence, function, and mechanisms. In Avian Visual Cognition [On-line](ed. R. G. Cook). Available: www.pigeon.psy.tufts.edu/avc/zentall
    Description: 碩士
    國立政治大學
    心理學研究所
    99752019
    102
    Source URI: http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0099752019
    Data Type: thesis
    Appears in Collections:[Department of Psychology] Theses

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    201901.pdf1876KbAdobe PDF2238View/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 Copyright Announcement
    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。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    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。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback