Advertisement

The Role of the Ostensive Communicative Context in the Childhood Social Learning

  • Emiliano LoriaEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10257)

Abstract

In 2006 Gergely Csibra and György Gergely proposed a new type of social cognitive learning mechanism, called “natural pedagogy”, grounded on the ostensive communication. According to their theory human infants show very early sensitivity to communicative and ostensive cues that indicate teaching contexts; they tend to interpret certain actions (e.g. gaze shift or pointing) occurring in these communicative contexts as referential cues to identify the referents about which new information will be provided. Furthermore, they argue, infants can infer that the information revealed about the referents in such ostensive communicative teaching contexts will not only be new and relevant, but will consist of publicly shared and universal cultural knowledge that is, thus, generalizable and shareable with other members of the cultural community. This last crucial point makes rise the question if mindreading capacities are involved in the pedagogical system, insofar infants are able to ascribe to others beliefs in the form of knowledge content transmitted and acquired in ostensive way.

Keywords

Ostensive communication Referential expectation Social learning Natural pedagogy Infant cognition Mindreading 

References

  1. 1.
    Sperber, D., Wilson, D.: Relevance: Communication and Cognition, 2nd edn. Blackwell, Oxford (1995)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Csibra, G.: Recognizing communicative intentions in infancy. Mind Lang. 25(2), 141–168 (2010). doi: 10.1111/j.1468-0017.2009.01384.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lloyd-Fox, S., Széplaki-Köllőd, B., Yin, J., Csibra, G.: Are you talking to me? Neural activations in 6-month-old infants in response to being addressed during natural interactions. Cortex 70, 35–48 (2015). doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.02.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Farroni, T., Csibra, G., Simion, F., Johnson, M.H.: Eye contact detection in humans from birth. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99(14), 9602–9605 (2002). doi: 10.1073/pnas.152159999 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mandel, D.R., Jusczyk, P.W., Pisoni, D.B.: Infants’ recognition of the sound patterns of their own names. Psychol. Sci. 6, 314–317 (1995). doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.1995.tb00517.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deligianni, F., Senju, A., Gergely, G., Csibra, G.: Automated gaze-contingent object elicit orientation following in 8-months-old infants. Develop. Psychol. 47, 1499–1503 (2011). doi: 10.1037/a0025659 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Senju, A., Csibra, G., Johnson, M.H.: Understanding the referential nature of looking: infants’ preference for object-directed gaze. Cognition 108, 303–319 (2008). doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Csibra, G., Gergely, G.: Social learning and social cognition: the case for pedagogy. In: Munakata, Y., Johnson, M.H. (eds.) Processes of Change in Brain and Cognitive Development. Attention and Performance, vol. XXI, pp. 249–274. Oxford UP, Oxford (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Csibra, G., Gergely, G.: Natural pedagogy. Trends Cogn. Sci. 13, 148–153 (2009). doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Csibra, G., Gergely, G.: Natural pedagogy as evolutionary adaptation. Philos. Trans. Roy. Soc. B 366, 1149–1157 (2011). doi: 10.1098/rstb.2010.0319 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Csibra, G., Gergely, G.: Natural pedagogy. In: Banaji, M.R., Gelman, S.A. (eds.) Navigating the Social World: What Infants, Children and Other Species Can Teach Us. Oxford UP, Oxford (2013). doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199890712.003.0023
  12. 12.
    Gergely, G., Egyed, K., Király, I.: On pedagogy. Develop. Sci. 10(1), 139–146 (2007). doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00576.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gergely, G.: Learning about versus learning from other minds: natural pedagogy and its implications. In: Carruthers, P., Laurence, S., Stich, S. (eds.) The Innate Mind: Foundations and the Future, vol. 3. Oxford UP, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jacob, P., Gergely, G.: Reasoning about instrumental and communicative agency in human infancy. In: Benson, J., Xu, F., Kushnir, T. (eds.) Rational Constructivism in Cognitive Development, pp. 59–94. Elsevier Inc., Academic Press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Egyed, K., Király, I., Gergely, G.: Communicating shared knowledge in infancy. Psychol. Sci. 24(7), 1348–1353 (2013). doi: 10.1177/0956797612471952 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Goldman, A.: Simulating Minds: The Philosophy, Psychology, and Neuroscience of Mindreading. Oxford UP, Oxford (2006). doi: 10.1093/0195138929.001.0001
  17. 17.
    Meltzoff, A.N.: Imitation and other minds: the like-me hypothesis. In: Hurley, S., Chater, N. (eds.) Perspectives on Imitation: From Neuroscience to Social Science, pp. 55–77. MIT Press, Cambridge (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carruthers, P.: Opacity of Mind: An Integrative Theory of Self-Knowledge. Oxford UP, Oxford (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carruthers, P.: Mindreading in infancy. Mind Lang. 28, 141–172 (2013). doi: 10.1111/mila.12014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Carey, S.: On the origin of causal understanding. In: Premack, A.J., Premack, D., Sperber, D. (eds.) Causal Cognition: A Multi Disciplinary Debate, pp. 268–308 Oxford, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tirassa, M., Bosco, F.M., Colle, L.: Rethinking the ontogeny of mindreading. Conscious. Cogn. 15, 197–217 (2006). doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2005.06.005 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kovács, A.M.: Belief files in theory of mind reasoning. Rev. Philos. Psychol. 7(2), 509–527 (2016). doi: 10.1007/s13164-015-0236-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Onishi, K.H., Baillargeon, R.: Do 15-month-old infants understand false beliefs? Science 308, 255–258 (2005). doi: 10.1126/science.1107621 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Surian, L., Caldi, S., Sperber, D.: Attribution of beliefs by 13 month-old infants. Psychol. Sci. 18, 550–586 (2007). doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01943.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Southgate, V., Senju, A., Csibra, G.: Action anticipation through attribution of false belief by 2-year-olds. Psychol. Sci. 18, 587–592 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kovács, A.M., Téglás, E., Endress, A.D.: The social sense: susceptibly to others’ beliefs in human infants and adults. Science 330, 1830–1834 (2010). doi: 10.1126/science.1190792 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Apperly, I., Butterfill, S.: Do humans have two systems to track beliefs and belief-like states? Psychol. Rev. 116(4), 953–970 (2009). doi: 10.1037/a0016923 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Butterfill, S., Apperly, I.: How to construct a minimal theory of mind. Mind Lang. 28, 606–637 (2013). doi: 10.1111/mila.12036 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jacob, P.: Challenging the two-systems model of mindreading (in press). https://iscinauguration.sciencesconf.org/data/program/Re_sumePierreJacob_1.docx
  30. 30.
    Carruthers, P.: Two systems for mindreading? Rev. Philos. Psychol. 7(1), 141–162 (2016). doi: 10.1007/s13164-015-0259-y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kampis, D., Somogyi, E., Itakura, S., Király, I.: Do infants bind mental states to agents? Cognition 129, 232–240 (2013). doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Luo, Y.: Do 10-month-old infants understand others’ false beliefs? Cognition 121(3), 289–298 (2011). doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2011.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consortium FINOTurin/GenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations