The Relation between Kenyan Childrens Behavioural Inhibition and Self-Oriented Behaviour in the Mirror Self-Recognition Test

The Relation between Kenyan Childrens Behavioural Inhibition and Self-Oriented Behaviour in the Mirror Self-Recognition Test

Mochi Bear ImutaStudent ID: 43789021

Word count: 998

Statement of Originality

I, Mochi Bear Imuta, declare that while the ideas for the study that this Introduction is on were developed as part of the Cycle of Science group project, I wrote this Introduction independently. I made amendments to the group project based on my tutors feedback, but I worked through this on my own and did not discuss my tutors feedback with other students. Any ideas or information that are based on previous scientific reports have been expressed in my own words and referenced appropriately. When citing ideas or information from scientific reports for which I did not read the primary source, I have referenced them using secondary citations. I also declare that no portion of this written work has been previously submitted for any other assessment, including the Cycle of Science e-Poster assignments.

The Relation between Kenyan Childrens Behavioural Inhibition and Self-Oriented Behaviour in the Mirror Self-Recognition Test

When in unfamiliar situations, some children are comfortable exploring their surroundings without explicit encouragement, while others exhibit behavioural inhibition (e.g., Kagan, 1989, as cited in Rubin et al., 2006)that is, they hesitate to take action and hold back on interacting with novel objects and strangers. While experimental tasks used to test childrens abilities often involve unfamiliar set-ups, the influence of behavioural inhibition on childrens performance on these tasks is largely ignored. For example, in the mirror self-recognition test, children are placed in front of a mirror in a novel experimental setting with a sticker that was surreptitiously placed on their foreheads. Children who display self-oriented behaviour (e.g., reach toward their forehead to remove the sticker) are considered to pass the test and have self-concept, or a sense of self that is recognised from the image in the mirror. Children who have yet to develop self-concept are thought to fail the test by reaching toward the mirror instead (Amsterdam, 1972, as cited in Broesch et al., 2011). In Western societies, children begin to display self-oriented behaviour by around 18 months of age, and the vast majority pass the test by around 24 months (e.g., Lewis & Ramsay, 2004, as cited in Broesch et al., 2011). Childrens spontaneous reactions to the sticker, however, appear to vary across cultures.

This was demonstrated in Broesch et al.s (2011) study which was aimed to examine childrens performance on the mirror self-recognition test across cultures. Broesch et al. (2011) administered the mirror self-recognition test to 18- to 72-month-olds from multiple Western (USA, Canada) and non-Western (Kenya, Peru, Saint Lucia, Grenada, Fiji) countries. While the vast majority of Western children displayed self-oriented behaviour, a comparatively smaller proportion of non-Western children did so. In particular, the most striking pattern of findings was demonstrated by Kenyan children: of the 82 Kenyans, only 2 passed the test by touching the sticker on their foreheads. Interestingly, the remaining 80 children failed the test, not by reaching towards the mirror, but because they frozethat is, they failed to take any action. Broesch et al. (2011) suggested that this may be because non-Western children are raised to be socially compliant and listen to instructions from adults before they act. In the context of the mirror self-recognition test used in Broesch et al.s (2011) study, since children were not given any explicit prompts to touch the sticker, non-Western children may have not known if it was acceptable for them to take action and reach for the sticker.

In fact, in non-Western cultures where social compliance is valued, non-Western children display greater hesitance in taking action in unfamiliar situations even when prompted to do so. This was demonstrated in Rubin et al.s (2006) study which was aimed to compare Western versus non-Western childrens levels of behavioural inhibition. Rubin et al. (2006) administered the Behavioural Inhibition Paradigm, wherein 24-month-olds from multiple Western and non-Western countries were placed in a room and an unfamiliar experimenter walked in with a novel toy robot. After 30 seconds, the experimenter invited the children to play with the robot. Childrens responses were observed for an additional minute. Compared to the Western children, non-Western children took significantly longer to touch the robot. On average, non-Western children did not reach for the robot until after they were given the explicit prompt to do so. In fact, the average time that non-Western children took to touch the robot was over 30 seconds after they were given the prompt.

Taken together, while Western children readily display self-oriented behaviour on the mirror self-recognition test by around 24 months, non-Western children hesitate to take action when they are not given explicit prompts to touch the sticker (Broesch et al., 2011). Furthermore, by this age, non-Western children demonstrate higher levels of behavioural inhibition compared to Western children, even when prompted to take action (Rubin et al., 2006). In the mirror self-recognition test where children are not given any prompts to reach for the sticker, therefore, non-Western children may freeze because their high levels of behavioural inhibition preclude them from spontaneously displaying the behaviour needed to pass the test. Broesch et al. (2011) only administered the mirror self-recognition test and did not measure other variables that may relate to childrens performance on the test. Thus, it is unclear whether non-Western children fail the mirror self-recognition test due to a lack of self-concept or due to another culturally relevant factornamely, their behavioural inhibitionhindering them from passing.

The aim of the present study, therefore, was to test the theory that non-Western childrens high levels of behavioural inhibition may be linked to their hesitance in taking action to demonstrate self-oriented behaviour in the mirror self-recognition test. We had 24-month-old Kenyan children take part in Rubin et al.s (2006) Behavioural Inhibition Paradigm, as well as an adapted version of Broesch et al.s (2011) mirror self-recognition testchildren were first placed in front of the mirror without any explicit prompts, but after 30 seconds, they were told to get the sticker! by the experimenter. Their response was then observed for an additional minute. We tested for the correlation between the amount of time it took for children to touch the robot in the Behavioural Inhibition Paradigm and the amount of time it took for children to reach for the sticker in the mirror self-recognition test.

We predicted that 24-month-old Kenyan children who take longer to touch the robot in the Behavioural Inhibition Paradigm will also take longer to reach for the sticker in the mirror self-recognition test. This was based on our theory that non-Western childrens high levels of behavioural inhibition may hinder them from readily demonstrating the action needed to pass the mirror self-recognition test. Furthermore, given that Broesch et al. (2011) found that the vast majority of Kenyan children freeze in the mirror self-recognition test with no explicit prompt to get the sticker, we expected that on average Kenyan children will not reach for the sticker until after the prompt to get the sticker! was given.

References

Broesch, T., Callaghan, T., Henrich, J., Murphy, C., & Rochat, P. (2011). Cultural variations in childrens mirror self-recognition. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 42(6), 1018-1029. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022110381114

Rubin, K. H., Hemphill, S. A., Chen, X., Hastings, P., Sanson, A., Coco, A. L., Zappulla, C., Chung, O., Park, S., Doh, H. S., Chen, H., Sun, L., Yoon, C., & Cui, L. (2006). A cross-cultural study of behavioral inhibition in toddlers: East-West-North-South. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(3), 219-226. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025406066723