The Effect of Maternal Mirroring Behavior on Infants’ Early Social Bidding During the Still‐Face Task
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maternal mirroring behavior, which is a particularly salient form of maternal responsiveness, was investigated as a predictor of infants’ social bids in the Still‐Face Task. Mother–infant dyads engaged in the Still‐Face Task when infants were 5 months, on the cusp of the active emergence of social bidding during the still‐face phase of the task. Maternal mirroring of infants’ behavior during the interactive phases of the task was a primary predictor of infants’ social bids in the still‐face phase. When infants were divided into those who experienced higher maternal mirroring (maternal mirroring above the mean of the sample) and infants who experienced lower maternal mirroring (maternal mirroring at or below the mean), infants with higher maternal mirroring showed increases in nondistress vocalizations during the still‐face phase, indicative of social bidding, whereas the infants with lower maternal mirroring showed little change in nondistress vocalizations across the phases. Maternal mirroring allows infants to readily notice the relation between their own behaviors and those of their mothers, which may enhance infants’ early understanding that they can be active agents in instigating social interactions, as demonstrated by social bidding.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it