Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T19:34:31.088Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Considering individual differences and variability is important in the development of the bifocal stance theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 November 2022

Hannah Puttre  and
Kathleen H. Corriveau Open the ORCID record for Kathleen H. Corriveau [Opens in a new window]
Hannah Puttre
Affiliation:
Wheelock College of Education and Human Development, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA [email protected]; [email protected]
Kathleen H. Corriveau
Affiliation:
Wheelock College of Education and Human Development, Boston University, Boston, MA 02215, USA [email protected]; [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Jagiello and colleagues offer a bifocal stance theory of cultural evolution for understanding how individuals flexibly choose between instrumental and ritual stances in social learning. We argue that the role of culture, developmental age-related differences, and the intersectionality of these and other individual's identities need to be more fully considered in this theoretical framework.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e266
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Berl, R. E., & Hewlett, B. S. (2015). Cultural variation in the use of overimitation by the Aka and Ngandu of the Congo Basin. PLoS ONE, 10(3), e0120180.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, E. E., Corriveau, K. H., Lai, V. K. W., Poon, S. L., & Gaither, S. E. (2018). Learning and socializing preferences in Hong Kong Chinese children. Child Development, 89(6), 2109–2117. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13083CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corriveau, K. H., DiYanni, C. J., Clegg, J. M., Min, G., Chin, J., & Nasrini, J. (2017). Cultural differences in the imitation and transmission of inefficient actions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 161, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corriveau, K. H., Kim, E., Song, G., & Harris, P. L. (2013). Young children's deference to a consensus varies by culture and judgment setting. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 13(3–4), 367–381. https://doi.org/10.1163/15685373-12342099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cui, Y. K., Clegg, J. M., Yan, E. F., Davoodi, T., Harris, P. L., & Corriveau, K. H. (2020). Religious testimony in a secular society: Belief in unobservable entities among Chinese parents and their children. Developmental Psychology, 56(1), 117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davoodi, T., Cui, Y. K., Clegg, J. M., Yan, F. E., Payir, A., Harris, P. L., & Corriveau, K. H. (2020). Epistemic justifications for belief in the unobservable: The impact of minority status. Cognition, 200, 104273.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DiYanni, C. J., Corriveau, K. H., Kurkul, K., Nasrini, J., & Nini, D. (2015). The role of consensus and culture in children's imitation of inefficient actions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 137, 99–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frick, A., Clément, F., & Gruber, T. (2017). Evidence for a sex effect during overimitation: Boys copy irrelevant modelled actions more than girls across cultures. Royal Society Open Science, 4(12), 170367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frick, A., Schleihauf, H., Satchell, L. P., & Gruber, T. (2021). Carry-over effects of tool functionality and previous unsuccessfulness increase overimitation in children. Royal Society Open Science, 8(7), 201373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gaither, S. E., Chen, E. E., Corriveau, K. H., Harris, P. L., Ambady, N., & Sommers, S. R. (2014). Monoracial and biracial children: Effects of racial identity saliency on social learning and social preferences. Child Development, 85(6), 2299–2316.Google ScholarPubMed
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), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGuigan, N., & Whiten, 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(4), 367–381.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGuigan, N., Whiten, A., Flynn, E., & Horner, V. (2007). Imitation of causally opaque versus causally transparent tool use by 3- and 5-year-old children. Cognitive Development, 22(3), 353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLoughlin, N., Jacob, C., Samrow, P., & Corriveau, K. H. (2021). Beliefs about unobservable scientific and religious entities are transmitted via subtle linguistic cues in parental testimony. Journal of Cognition and Development, 22(3), 379–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Over, H., & Carpenter, M. (2012). Putting the social into social learning: Explaining both selectivity and fidelity in children's copying behavior. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126, 182–192.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reifen Tagar, M., Federico, C. M., Lyons, K. E., Ludeke, S., & Koenig, M. A. (2014). Heralding the authoritarian? Orientation toward authority in early childhood. Psychological Science, 25(4), 883–892.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilks, M., Kirby, J., & Nielsen, M. (2019). Developmental changes in young children's willingness to copy the antisocial actions of ingroup members in a minimal group context. Developmental Psychology, 55(4), 709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, L. A., Kendal, R. L., & Flynn, E. G. (2012). Context-dependent model-based biases in cultural transmission: Children's imitation is affected by model age over model knowledge state. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(4), 387–394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar