The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Experience matters: The impact of doing versus watching on infants' subsequent perception of tool-use events.
Open accessAbstract
Prior work suggests that active experience affects infants' understanding of simple actions. The present studies compared the impact of active and observational experience on infants' ability to identify the goal of a novel tool-use event. Infants either received active training and practice in using a cane to retrieve an out-of-reach toy or had matched observational experience before taking part in a habituation paradigm that we used to assess infants' ability to identify the goal of another person's tool-use acts. Active training alone facilitated 10-month-old infants' ability to identify the goal of the tool-use event. Active experience using tools may enable infants to build motor representations of tool-use events that subsequently guide action perception and support action understanding.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-2412 · Cited by 3,670
Neural simulation of action: a unifying mechanism for motor cognition.
Jeannerod, M. (2001) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.0832 · Cited by 2,563
Perception and Action Planning
Prinz, W. (1997) · European Journal of Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1080/713752551 · Cited by 2,013
Umiltà, M. A., Kohler, E., Gallese, V., Fogassi, L., Fadiga, L., Keysers, C., & Rizzolatti, G. (2001) · Neuron · doi:10.1016/s0896-6273(01)00337-3 · Cited by 1,192
Grafton, S., Arbib, M., Fadiga, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996) · Experimental Brain Research · doi:10.1007/bf00227183 · Cited by 1,045
Meltzoff, A. N. (2002) · Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development · doi:10.1002/9780470996652.ch1 · Cited by 165
Cited by
Best, J. R. (2010) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2010.08.001 · Cited by 1,078
Mirror neurons: from origin to function
Cook, R., Bird, G., Catmur, C., Press, C., & Heyes, C. (2014) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x13000903 · Cited by 647
Young infants prefer prosocial to antisocial others
Hamlin, J. K., & Wynn, K. (2011) · Cognitive Development · doi:10.1016/j.cogdev.2010.09.001 · Cited by 608
The Utility of EEG Band Power Analysis in the Study of Infancy and Early Childhood
Saby, J. N., & Marshall, P. J. (2012) · Developmental Neuropsychology · doi:10.1080/87565641.2011.614663 · Cited by 333
Adolph, K. E., & Robinson, S. R. (2015) · Handbook of Child Psychology and Developmental Science · doi:10.1002/9781118963418.childpsy204 · Cited by 135
Metadata
- Authors
- Sommerville, J. A., Hildebrand, E. A., & Crane, C. C.
- Venue
- Developmental Psychology
- Published
- 2008
- Volume
- 44
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1249-1256
- ISSN
- 0012-1649 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-0599
- OpenAlex
- W2013219387
- Cited by
- 195
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 22.08
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Experience matters: The impact of doing versus watching on infants' subsequent perception of tool-use events. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/a0012296
- The paper
- Sommerville, J. A., Hildebrand, E. A., & Crane, C. C. (2008). Experience matters: The impact of doing versus watching on infants' subsequent perception of tool-use events. Developmental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012296
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
