Re-examination of Oostenbroek et al. (2016): evidence for neonatal imitation of tongue protrusion

The meaning, mechanism, and functionof imitationin early infancy have been actively discussed since Meltzoff and Moore's (1977) report of facial and manual imitationby human neonates. Oostenbroek et al. (2016) claim to challenge the existence of early imitationand to counter all interpretations so far offered. Such claims, if true, would have implications for theories of social- cognitive development. Here we identify 11 flaws in Oostenbroek et al.'s experimental design that biased the results toward null effects. We requested and obtained the authors’ raw data. Contrary to the authors’ conclusions, new analyses reveal significant tongue-protrusion imitationat all four ages tested (1, 3, 6, and 9 weeks old). We explain how the authors missed this pattern and offer five recommendations for designing future experiments. Infant imitationraises fundamental issues about action representation, social learning, and brain–behavior relations. The debate about the origins and development of imitationreflects its importance to theories of developmental science.