Chapter 4 - Early Objectification of the Self

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(05)80006-8Get rights and content

Section snippets

Goal Orientation and Exploration in the Newborn

Until fairly recently, and in the footsteps of William James, many authors insisted on the chaotic, blooming, buzzing confusion of neonates. René Spitz presented newborn behavior as “… random, unstructured, and … inconsistent” (Spitz, 1965, p. 54). At first sight, many reasons exist to consider neonates as highly immature entities, whose behavior is on the whole erratic, manifesting vegetative (organismic) rather than psychological functioning. From this perspective and in relation to the

Early Sense of Self and the Perception of Body Effectivities by Young Infants

If we accept that at no point in development infants can be reduced to automata, that their behavior is not merely a collection of S-R links, and if we consider that from the beginning behavior is guided by functional goals and survival values that are an integral part of the newborn’s action systems, then the claim of an early sense of self is reasonable. If a biological system does not simply respond automatically to meaningless stimulation, and if, on the contrary, it shows exploration,

Object Exploration and the Early Objectification of the Self

Parallel to the development of goal-oriented action systems from which emerges an early sense of self (e.g., the perception of body effectivities in relation to functional goals), infants also develop a propensity to contemplate and analyze the results of their own actions on objects. When infants explore and act in the environment, they learn as much about the object with which they are interacting as they learn about themselves. To explore objects is indeed to coexplore oneself, to paraphrase

Early Objectification of Self in Others

In perceiving and acting in the social environment, infants develop a special set of expertise that they do not acquire in interacting with inanimate, nonintentional objects. I will argue that before recognizing themselves in mirrors, pictures, or films, infants start recognizing themselves in others, via imitation and the reciprocity of social interactions. In reproducing emotional expressions, perceiving emotions in others, monitoring their own, and probing how they impact on others, infants

Conclusion: The Paradox of the Physical Mirror

As a conclusion, I would like to convey a final idea regarding reactions to specular images or mirror reflections, which often have been used by comparative and developmental psychologists as a mean to assess the emergence of self-awareness (e..g., see the influential work of Gallup, 1970, Lewis and Brooks-Gunn, 1979).

This idea is that reactions to specular images are interesting, not because they denote the presence or absence of self-awareness, but because they can potentially denote

First page preview

First page preview
Click to open first page preview

REFERENCES (43)

  • FantzR.L.

    Pattern vision in newborn infants

    Science

    (1963)
  • GallupG.G.

    Chimpanzees: Self-recognition

    Science

    (1970)
  • GallupG.G.

    Self-awareness and the emergence of mind in primates

    Amercan Journal of Primatology

    (1982)
  • GibsonJ.J.

    The ecological approach to visual perception

    (1979)
  • HofstenC. von

    Eye-hand coordination in newborns

    Developmental Psychology

    (1982)
  • HofstenC. von et al.

    Preparation for grasping an object: A development study

    Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

    (1988)
  • JamesW.

    The principles of psychology

    (1890)
  • JohnsonM.H. et al.

    Biology and cognitive development: The case of face recognition

    (1991)
  • KayeK.

    The mental and social life of babies: How parents create persons

    (1982)
  • LewisM. et al.

    Social cognition and the acquisition of self

    (1979)
  • LewisM. et al.

    Emotional behavior during the learning contingency in early infancy

    British Journal of Developmental Psychology

    (1985)
  • Cited by (54)

    • Influences of infants’ and mothers’ contingent vocal responsiveness on young infants’ vocal social bids in the Still Face Task

      2022, Infant Behavior and Development
      Citation Excerpt :

      Infants’ social development may be dependent on the behavior of their social partners, but infants are active participants in their own development. Although infants have a sense of self agency from birth, as shown by their actions on their own bodies (Rochat, 1995; Rochat & Hespos, 1997), and in the physical environment (Watson, 1979, 1985), it is in interactions with others that their awareness of their agency escalates (Gergely & Watson, 1999). This is because others tend to be responsive to infant behaviors.

    • Distinguishing three levels in explicit self-awareness

      2011, Consciousness and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      Human studies have shown that children are able to recognize themselves from 18 to 24 months onwards (e.g. Amsterdam, 1972; Asendorpf, Warkentin, & Baudonniere, 1996; Bertenthal & Fischer, 1978; Bigelow, 1981; Bullock & Lutkenhaus, 1990; Johnson, 1983; Lewis & Brooks-Gunn, 1979; Lewis, Brooks-Gunn, & Jaskir, 1985; Nielsen, Dissanayake, & Kashima, 2003; Schulman & Kaplowitz, 1977). Even though there is a broad consensus to recognize that the achievement of mirror self-recognition is an important developmental milestone in the second year of life (e.g. Anderson, 1984; Asendorpf & Baudonniere, 1993; Bertenthal & Fischer, 1978; Butterworth, 1992; Gallup, 1982; Kagan, 1981; Lewis, 1994; Neisser, 1993; Povinelli, 1993, 1995; Rochat, 1995), the meaning of mirror self-recognition as a marker of self-awareness has not gone unchallenged. Indeed, other interpretations of the mirror response have been proposed that do not require the subject to have explicit self-awareness.

    • The uncanny mirror: A re-framing of mirror self-experience

      2011, Consciousness and Cognition
      Citation Excerpt :

      An “uncanny” sort of out of the body experience. This forms a deep experiential “me but not me” paradox (Rochat, 1995). From a comparative perspective, the fact that an increasing number of mammalian and even avian species are reported passing the test, puts pressure on what it might exactly mean, in particular whether it implies actual “re-cognition” in the sense of an internal model of self that is identified in the specular image.

    • Intentional action arises from early reciprocal exchanges

      2007, Acta Psychologica
      Citation Excerpt :

      This context is the template for the intentionality expressed in relation to physical objects, intentionality that starts to be manifested by infants by the time they begin to smile in the context of reciprocal social exchanges (see below, Rochat & Striano, 1999a). Infants might learn also to objectify themselves in the exploration of their own dynamic traces in objects they acted upon: a mobile they kicked or a ball they pushed (Piaget, 1952; Rochat, 1995, 2002; Watson, 1995). The effect of self-generated actions on the object does indeed reflect the dynamic and the amount of energy produced by the infant who can pause and contemplate traces of himself in such effects.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text