“I'm an ogre so I'm very hungry!” “I'm assistant ogre”: The Social Function of Sibling Imitation in Early Childhood
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Siblings' imitative behaviors were investigated in 39 middle‐class dyads during six 90‐min home sessions at both Time 1 (M age: older sibling = 4.4 years; younger sibling = 2.4 years) and Time 2 (2 years later). Although younger siblings imitated most often at T1 and T2, older siblings' imitation increased proportionally over time in comparison to younger siblings. Findings highlight the affiliative nature of imitation that occurred during reciprocal play interactions, via positive responses, and the content of the imitation. Finally, age was controlled by comparing first‐born siblings aged 4 at T1 to second‐born siblings aged 4 at T2. Findings demonstrated that sibling imitation had distinct characteristics despite the age match and partner effects. Sibling imitation is a dynamic, interactive social behavior and may be a powerful source of learning for young children. Highlights The role of sibling imitation in ongoing play in early childhood is highlighted. Sibling imitation is a dynamic and affiliative behavior that promotes interaction during play. Naturalistic observations of sibling imitation document that it is a powerful source of learning for young children.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".