It is proverbial that monkeys carry the principle of imitation … they are animals that imitate for the mere sake of imitating. – Romanes (1884, p. 477) Scimmiottare in Italian, singer in French, macaquear in Portuguese, nachäffen in German, majmuna in Bulgarian, obez'janstvovat' in Russian, majmol in Hungarian, matpowac ' in Polish, and “to ape” in English – each of these verbs is derived from a linguistic root that in that particular language labels primates. Across different languages and cultures, these verbs consistently mean “to imitate.” The convergence across different cultures of the terms denoting monkeys and imitation reflects the common view that monkeys are excellent imitators. It is quite true that nonhuman and human primates share basic features of anatomy and movement. Because of their physical similarities to humans, nonhuman primates are the best candidates to perform actions resembling our own, and this may encourage the idea that they copy us. But are primates really proficient imitators? The functional value of imitation as a means of producing similar behaviors among members of a group has been emphasized by many (e.g., Davis, 1973; Hauser, 1988; Meltzoff & Moore, 1983). Imitation is particularly useful as a means of learning from others when the observer is not proficient, when opportunities for practice are limited, when the costs of errors are high, and when learning by individual experience would be a slow process.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 244 citations exist upstream.