The importance of distinguishing propensity versus ability to imitate in ASD research and early detection.
When you screen 12-month-olds, track both skill and willingness to imitate—confusing the two creates false red flags.
01Research in Context
What this study did
Vivanti (2015) wrote a short theory paper. He looked at why baby-screening studies give mixed answers about imitation in autism.
He said past work lumps two things together: can the baby copy, and does the baby want to copy. He urged testers to split them.
What they found
The paper found no new data. It showed that mixing "can copy" with "will copy" muddies 12-month autism screens.
Clear labels, the author claims, will end the back-and-forth results.
How this fits with other research
La Malfa et al. (2004) reviewed dozens of studies and said kids with ASD copy less because their sensory-motor maps are off, not because they do not care. Vivanti (2015) answers: "Maybe, but the tasks also score willingness and skill as one."
Sowden et al. (2016) tested adults with ASD and found automatic imitation equal to controls. Schunke et al. (2016) saw slower, not missing, imitative control in adults. These adult findings seem to clash with baby-screen confusion, yet the gap is age, not truth.
James et al. (1981) warned that ignoring maturational lag can fake autism effects. Giacomo repeats the warning for imitation: measure both propensity and ability or risk a fake deficit.
Why it matters
Next time you run or read an imitation assessment, ask: Does this score show the child can copy, or that they chose to copy? Add a quick motivation probe—like letting the baby play with the toy first—then re-test. Separating the two numbers gives cleaner baseline data and keeps you from writing "poor imitator" when the child simply was not interested.
Want CEUs on This Topic?
The ABA Clubhouse has 60+ free CEUs — live every Wednesday. Ethics, supervision & clinical topics.
Join Free →Add a 30-second free-play period before imitation trials and note if the baby copies after you have their attention.
02At a glance
03Original abstract
Imitation abnormalities are often documented in young children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD), however the relevance of imitation to early development and early detection of ASD remains unclear. Recent studies that investigated whether imitation at 12 months distinguishes children who will subsequently receive an ASD diagnosis from other high-risk groups have reported conflicting results. The purpose of this note is to provide a framework to interpret these conflicting findings, which is based on the often-overlooked distinction between the propensity to imitate and the ability to imitate. We argue that this distinction can critically inform understanding of early imitative behaviour in ASD and the development of early detection procedures.
Journal of autism and developmental disorders, 2015 · doi:10.1007/s10803-014-2254-z