RE: [xmca] Honestly....

[Rod Parker-Rees <R.Parker-Rees@plymouth.ac.uk>]

I think one of the problems with developmental psychology (and one of its strengths) is the tendency to try to isolate 'the' key variable (eye movement, head movement, vocalisations) in a given behaviour so that its effects can be studied in a properly scientific way. This is why so much early research in infants' visual perception was conducted with black and white 'faces' and later photographs. It does seem more likely,  however, that what a baby 'recognises' in a familiar person (especially mother) is a more complex and dynamic pattern of changes. Several sentient months in utero provide plenty of time to get to know mother's rhythms (and the rhythms of mother's language) before birth. What is also fascinating is that it took a few generations of women in psychology departments before their feeling that something was being missed found its way into publications.

This is from Reddy and Trevarthen (2004)

In 1993 the late Professor Elizabeth Bates, a pioneering researcher on early communication and language learning, was an invited speaker at a conference of the British Psychological Society in Birmingham, England.  She was in the audience when another invited speaker, Prof. Giannis Kugiumutzakis of the University of Crete, presented his findings on the imitation of vocal sounds and facial gestures by babies less than an hour old. Neonatal imitation has been one of the most controversial of all twentieth century findings in infant development, violating the Piagetian model that assumes that all social skills, including imitation, are complex intellectual achievements involving much trial and error in an infant's early months.  In a question to Prof Kugiumutzakis, Prof. Bates admitted that she had been one of the sceptics, disbelieving in the possibility of neonatal imitation - until she had tried it with a grandchild.  Experiencing the response to her attempts she was convinced.

So even a female researcher in early communication and language could miss this in her own children and only acknowledge it after an experience with a grandchild! We may be summoned to interaction by adults but also by technology (slow-motion video and computer frame analysis) and culture - knowing what we should expect to observe.

All the best,

Rod
________________________________________
From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu] On Behalf Of mike cole [lchcmike@gmail.com]
Sent: 30 April 2010 16:20
To: Avis Ridgway
Cc: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity; Avis Ridgway
Subject: Re: [xmca] Honestly....

What you describe, Avis, is very much like what Meltzoff et al have been
describing for a long time.... for which there is more than one
explanation. I believe there is work on yawning as contagion so I would
focus on tongue protrusion just to "simplify" things.

The GREAT thing about first person accounts of new parents (and observing
grandparents!) is that they see things as real observing participants in a
special way. Its also a difficulty at times precisely because they are
participants, they are interacting, and it is extra- ordinarily difficult to
tell the dancer from the dance.

Unhappily, I became professionally interested in early development only
after my kids were somewhat older. No home flics, no clear recording or
memory. And a man. On this topic, it seems to me that the mother's point of
view is especially important. So its really nice to have several women with
first hand experience helping us to understand what we are talking about.
But even so, it is impossible for a mom to vary eye movement, head movement,
and hairline independently to figure out what the newcomer is looking at.
Seems like the best we can do is triangulate different sources of info and
be sure we have lots of them/// triangles all the way down, I suppose.
mike

On Fri, Apr 30, 2010 at 1:14 AM, Avis Ridgway <avisr@netspace.net.au> wrote:

> Thanks Mike.
>
> Video is not available on web (but with family).
>
> I can describe what I see however. Others may interpret the scenario
> differently, which is what makes this discussion list so useful. The
> relational dynamics are what really interest me.
>
> The 12 hour old child is held by her father in a way that they share close
> (half arm's length) face to face contact.
> Baby's mother is filming from the hospital bed. The first time parents
> share a "project"....to see if their new born baby will respond to them and
> to film this.
>
> Baby focuses intently on father's face as he speaks to her and father pokes
> his tongue right out. She is not protruding her tongue randomly but makes a
> large gesture tongue poking right out, in immediate reply to her father's
> gesture.
>
> When father changes the gesture to a big exaggerated yawn, baby appears to
> perceive the change in gesture because she yawns a big stretching face yawn
> right after father has.
>
> Father does the yawn twice to see if it was random, but it appears that
> baby is perceiving his gesture because she yawns (not tongue poking) as he
> has done.
>
> What I see is  a very early example of how learning is mediated in a social
> context. Why are the parents filming? They are extremely interested in
> hearing and speech (their professions). The beginnings of communication.
> This is an example (I think) of mediated learning ...
>
> Baby has never stuck her tongue out like that before nor has she made a
> wide yawn before....however she apparently perceives her father
> communicating in these ways and promptly returns the two very different
> facial gestures he gives to her.
>
> This is a first time....baby not yet a day old....baby perceived two quite
> different gestures and returned them to father.
> In my thinking it is about reciprocity, responding in a way that was
> meaningful for both parents.
>
> Vygotsky (1997) urged researchers to “begin with the small insignificant
> facts and elevate the study of them to a high theoretical level, to attempt
> to discover how the great is revealed in the very small” (p.41).
>
> I'm really interested in these small first moments of
> reciprocity.....between father, mother and new born baby.
>
> Thank you MIke for the linking reference to Elen's scholarly work.
>
> Avis.
>
> On 30/04/2010, at 9:46 AM, mike cole wrote:
>
> I, too, have found this thread really interesting. The video you mention,
> Avis, sounds fascinating. Is it available somewhere on the web? These
> phenomena are mostly written about or depicted in still shots. Seeing the
> dynamics would be really interesting.
>
> I have not been following the newborn development literature closely in the
> past couple of years, but I think one of the points
> of continuing interest/concern/controversy is how to interpret early
> capacities once thought present only much later. Early
> infant imitation has been among those controversial areas, although my
> impression is that along with other signs of early
> capacities (infant response to human face, surprise when elementary
> physical
> "laws" are violated, etc.) there is a lot
> broader acceptance of the existence of such capacities than there was when
> Bower was writing.
>
> I think that part of the current focus of research is on whether such
> phenomena are learned, or "pre-pared" by our phylogenetic history.
>
> When you write:
> "These video recordings over the first days , weeks and months and spoken
> observations are very helpful in showing that learning from birth is
> supported by a social situation, and also shows how parents 'in the know'
> observe with intention and how that interested observation builds abilities
> in the child to respond" I am unclear about your view of the first
> manifestations of, say, tongue protrusion. That first time, was it learned?
>
> I totally agree that the social situation of development is central to
> learning AND development, and that the interested observation of those in
> the know is central to creating contingencies that make the process build.
> But the first time?
>
> Perhaps I have misinterpreted both you and David. The issue of the sources
> of change in early infancy, like later developmental periods, along with
> the
> issue of "origins" seems very well worth our careful consideration.
>
> I also want to second David Kellog's invocation of Elen Dissanayake's work.
> She also wrote a marvelous article in a book
> on the origins of music, focused on ontogenetic origins in humans, that she
> relates to early language acquisition, which, for
> hearing children, pretty certainly begins before birth and is built upon in
> reciprocal interactions thereafter. See
> http://www.ellendissanayake.com/ for a lot more by this really interesting
> scholar.
>
> mike
>
> PS-- And thanks for the ref to Marilyn Fleer's book. With her article now
> under discussion at XMCA maybe we can
> cadge a copy of the book for review in MCA!!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 9:39 PM, Avis Ridgway <avisr@netspace.net.au>
> wrote:
>
> Thanks for interest and sharing references.
>
>
> My point in sharing was not to illuminate "temporary cognitive
>
> capabilities"
>
> (understood for years), but to go far wider and direct our thoughts more to
>
> the role of the daily life social context
>
> and play in children's learning and development.
>
>
> Fleer, M. (2010). Early Learning and Development: Cultural-historical
>
> concepts in play.
>
> Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
>
>
>
> Avis
>
>
> On 29/04/2010, at 12:28 PM, David H Kirshner wrote:
>
>
> The amazing, but temporary, cognitive capabilities of newborns was
>
> documented decades ago. The following article presents pictures as
>
> evidence.
>
> Bower, T. G. R. (1976, Nov. 23). Repetitive processes in child
>
> development. Scientific American, 5(5), 38-47.
>
> David
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> From: xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu [mailto:xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu<xmca-bounces@weber.ucsd.edu>
> ]
>
> On Behalf Of Avis Ridgway
>
> Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 3:49 AM
>
> To: eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity
>
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Honestly....
>
>
> Adding to Helen's observation, I have video of my son ( an
>
> audiologist) holding his 12 hours old daughter out in front of him
>
> along his arm, head supported in extended arm and hand ..., so that
>
> they are face to face. He is checking to see if she responds to him.
>
> He sticks his tongue out at her and she does this back to him. He
>
> calls to his wife who is videoing this from the hospital bed "did you
>
> see that??? He does it again and she "replies"/ copies"
>
>
> He tries something different. He does a yawn and YES she yawns back.
>
> These responses are recorded on the video.
>
>
> As a researcher in early childhood, I can see that my granddaughter's
>
> early responses have been carefully noted, especially her speech
>
> development because her mother is a speech pathologist. Both parents
>
> paid very careful attention to record very early sounds and
>
> responses.  These video recordings over the first days , weeks and
>
> months and spoken observations are very helpful in showing that
>
> learning from birth is supported by a social situation, and also shows
>
> how parents 'in the know' observe with intention and how that
>
> interested observation builds abilities in the child to respond.
>
>
> Avis
>
>
> On 28/04/2010, at 12:25 PM, Martin Packer wrote:
>
>
> Helen,
>
>
> I am sure that you have a very smart daughter!  But I do think that
>
> what you've described is not as unusual as the nurses viewed it.
>
> Nurses do so much more than their fair share of the work in a
>
> hospital that they don't generally have the time or opportunity to
>
> observe what neonates are doing.
>
>
> A few weeks ago I mentioned here the research of Fajans, one of Kurt
>
> Lewin's students, who showed that the response of an infant to an
>
> interesting object varied depending on whether an adult was present
>
> or not. The infant seemed to perceive the object as more potentially
>
> available if someone were around to fetch it, and of course during
>
> the first year infants require that other people not only feed and
>
> clothe them, but move them around and fetch and carry for them. In
>
> your case, you facilitated your infant daughter's response to the
>
> nurse entering the room by supporting her, probably holding her in a
>
> seated position, because the newborn's head is so large in
>
> proportion to the body that they have very limited ability to move
>
> it unaided.
>
>
> It's interesting that your second observation was when she was about
>
> 2 months old, because there's a marked change in the organization of
>
> infant behavior at around six weeks. Neonatologists distinguish 6
>
> behavioral states in newborns, but around 6 weeks it gets very hard
>
> to apply the criteria. I had the opportunity to discuss this with
>
> Hanus Papousek, who I believed first developed the scoring of these
>
> states, and he confirmed my observation. One has the impression that
>
> already the infant has acquired some degree of control of their own
>
> reactions to the environment (note how I wove in those Vygotskian
>
> terms!), and consequently has greater ability to initiate
>
> interactions, such as the overtures to the other baby that you
>
> describe.
>
>
> Why infants are so fascinated by other infants continues to puzzle
>
> me, however! Perhaps it's the similarity of tempo.
>
>
> Martin
>
>
> On Apr 27, 2010, at 7:40 PM, Helen Grimmett wrote:
>
>
> When I was in hospital with my first baby I was sitting on my bed one
>
> morning holding my new daughter and singing her a song, engrossed
>
> in how
>
> intently she was watching me. As I sang, a nurse entered the room and
>
> Natalie immediately swung her head round to look at her. The nurse
>
> was
>
> stunned, saying she had never seen such a young baby (a few days
>
> old) do
>
> that.
>
>
> About 7-8 weeks later at my new mums group the maternal health nurse
>
> commented on the way that Natalie (being held on my lap) was watching
>
> and smiling at the baby on the Mum's lap next to me. "She's going
>
> to be
>
> a bright one, that one!" she 'warned' me.
>
>
> Being my first baby, I didn't recognise any of these actions as
>
> unusual
>
> and thought this must be what all babies do, but the maternity nurses
>
> who had seen hundreds of babies thought it was very unusual. Perhaps
>
> Martin, it was those very early (within hours) intense interactions
>
> of
>
> talking, singing and reading to her that 'summoned' her to expect
>
> others
>
> to be interesting to interact with too? But don't all new parents do
>
> this? (Well perhaps not the reading! - That was the luck of this
>
> child
>
> to have two primary school teachers as parents!)
>
>
> Interesting....
>
> Helen
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> From: Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu>
>
> Date: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 8:13 am
>
> Subject: Re: [xmca] Honestly....
>
> To: "eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca@weber.ucsd.edu>
>
>
> Andy,
>
>
> Thanks for the Levontin, which I will read with pleasure. But on
>
> this issue I'm drawing more on my own experience than what I read
>
> in books. After I finished my undergraduate degree I didn't want to
>
> get a PhD, so I looked for work around London and managed to get a
>
> research job that involved conducting observations of neonatal
>
> behavior at birth and an assessment (designed by pediatrician Berry
>
> Brazelton) of their capabilities during the first weeks of life (we
>
> repeated it at intervals from about 3 hours to 6 weeks of age). I
>
> am attaching a photo I took of one of our research participants to
>
> illustrate why I think it's not quite right to say that children
>
> must 'acquire' the tendency to engage in interaction. To talk of
>
> the child being 'summoned' to interaction works better for me, and
>
> obviously children need to be drawn out (but 'trained'? Not so sure
>
> about that!). I forget the exact age of this child, but he was
>
> about 3 days old. My students are always surprised to see how
>
> attentive and intent such a young baby can be.
>
>
> Martin
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> xmca mailing list
>
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> xmca mailing list
>
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> xmca mailing list
>
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> xmca mailing list
>
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> xmca mailing list
>
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
>
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> xmca mailing list
> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca
_______________________________________________
xmca mailing list
xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca