How Do We Learn From Other People?

Observation, imitation, instruction, and the selective use of social information

Level: Intermediate
Reading load: 9 core readings in 5 units
Prerequisites: The foundation syllabus, How Does Experience Change Behavior?, or familiarity with the distinction between learning and performance. A willingness to compare experimental conditions and follow theoretical arguments. The reading guides introduce specialized terms; the other Learning & Behavior specialist paths are not prerequisites.
Last reviewed: September 2026

Introduction

Much of a life is learned at second hand. We watch actions, listen to explanations, notice what happens to others, and decide whose testimony deserves belief. These encounters can change what we know, attempt, and express. Understanding the change requires us to ask what information another person supplies and how the learner makes use of it.

This path moves from a conceptual distinction between social information and learning mechanisms to experiments on how information reaches a learner through other animals' sensory cues, demonstrations, and actions. It then asks how being taught changes the interpretation of a demonstration, and how children and adults use evidence about a source. A final synthesis brings these contributions together and examines where the explanations disagree.

The comparative studies are included for their experimental contrasts: rats can acquire food information without copying an action; chimpanzees and children can respond differently to the same visible causal structure. These findings help sharpen questions about human learning while making the limits of comparisons across species and settings explicit.

By the end, you should be able to distinguish acquiring information from expressing it, compare imitation with learning about outcomes, evaluate claims about instruction and trust, and propose a test that separates competing explanations of socially influenced behavior. The path contains nine articles across five units. Its main preparation is How Does Experience Change Behavior?.

Unit 1 of 5

Begin by separating the source of information from the process that changes behavior. Heyes proposes continuity between social and individual learning; Galef and Wigmore provide a case where careful sensory controls reveal information transfer without a visible action to imitate.

Reading
1 of 9
What’s Social About Social Learning?
Heyes, C. (2012). What’s social about social learning? Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126(2), 193–202. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025180
Foundational argument · Critical reappraisal · Moderate · Full work: 10 pages
Track the distinction between what a learner notices, what is encoded, and what behavior later changes. Keep the paper’s narrower treatment of observational learning in view.
Why you’re reading it. Establish a framework for asking whether a social source requires a distinct learning mechanism.
A question to consider. If watching someone use an object only makes you inspect that object more often, what evidence would distinguish attention from acquisition of the demonstrated action?
Reading
2 of 9
Transfer of Information Concerning Distant Foods: A Laboratory Investigation of the ‘Information-Centre’ Hypothesis
Galef, B. G., Jr., & Wigmore, S. W. (1983). Transfer of information concerning distant foods: A laboratory investigation of the ‘information-centre’ hypothesis. Animal Behaviour, 31(3), 748–758. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-3472(83)80232-2
Landmark empirical study · Methodological contribution · Moderate · Full work: 11 pages
Follow the barrier, anaesthesia, and smell-loss comparisons as successive attempts to identify a channel of transmission. Compare what these controls show with the broader information-centre hypothesis.
Why you’re reading it. Apply the distinction between a social source, a sensory channel, and a learning mechanism to an experiment.
A question to consider. Why would two rats preferring the same food be insufficient evidence of social learning, and which feature of this design makes the inference stronger?

Unit 2 of 5

What is acquired when we watch an action?

Modeling can provide information about actions and their consequences, while incentives affect whether learned behavior is expressed. Bandura distinguishes those questions. Horner and Whiten then ask whether observers reproduce the demonstrated sequence or use information about its outcome.

Reading
3 of 9
Influence of Models’ Reinforcement Contingencies on the Acquisition of Imitative Responses
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition of imitative responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1(6), 589–595. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0022070
Landmark empirical study · Methodological contribution · Accessible · Full work: 7 pages
Separate the consequences delivered to the filmed model from the incentives later offered to the observing child. If you met the paper in the foundation, revisit it with this distinction in mind.
Why you’re reading it. Identify the evidence that initial imitation is an incomplete measure of what an observer acquired.
A question to consider. A child initially omits an action after watching the model be punished, then produces it when offered an incentive. What does the second phase change about the interpretation of the first?
Reading
4 of 9
Causal Knowledge and Imitation/Emulation Switching in Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and Children (Homo sapiens)
Horner, V., & Whiten, A. (2005). Causal knowledge and imitation/emulation switching in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and children (Homo sapiens). Animal Cognition, 8(3), 164–181. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-004-0239-6
Landmark empirical study · Methodological contribution · Challenging · Full work: 18 pages
Compare opaque and transparent boxes, the relevant and irrelevant actions, and the additional checks on causal knowledge. Keep copying fidelity distinct from efficient reward retrieval.
Why you’re reading it. Distinguish reproducing actions from learning about outcomes, while evaluating the limits of a species comparison.
A question to consider. How could the same unnecessary action indicate uncertainty in one learner and an attempt to follow a convention in another? Propose a comparison that would help tell them apart.

Unit 3 of 5

How does being taught change what we infer?

A learner can treat an action as a demonstration meant to communicate something. Csibra and Gergely offer a theory of this transition and its role in generalization. Bonawitz and colleagues test how interpreting a demonstration as a lesson may change exploration of what was left unshown.

Reading
5 of 9
Natural Pedagogy
Csibra, G., & Gergely, G. (2009). Natural pedagogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4), 148–153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.005
Foundational argument · Moderate · Full work: 6 pages
Connect the proposed sensitivity to communicative signals with the expectation that a demonstrated property is generalizable. Distinguish this claim from increased attention and from the proposal’s evolutionary history.
Why you’re reading it. Introduce instruction as an interpretive context, and consider whether it requires more than the observational mechanisms discussed in Unit 1.
A question to consider. What result would challenge the claim that being deliberately addressed changes the kind of information a learner expects to acquire?
Reading
6 of 9
The Double-Edged Sword of Pedagogy: Instruction Limits Spontaneous Exploration and Discovery
Bonawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N. D., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition, 120(3), 322–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.10.001
Landmark empirical study · Methodological contribution · Moderate · Full work: 9 pages
Link each demonstration condition to an assumption about the adult’s knowledge and intent. Use the measures of exploration and discovery to assess what the model predicts and what the experiments actually establish.
Why you’re reading it. Apply a conceptual account of instruction to evidence about both learning efficiently and overlooking alternatives.
A question to consider. Why might showing every relevant function reverse the practical lesson someone draws from this experiment’s deliberately incomplete demonstration?

Unit 4 of 5

Whose information should we use, and when?

Learning from another person raises a problem of evaluation. Koenig and colleagues distinguish noticing a speaker’s errors from using that history to learn new words. Morgan and colleagues broaden the question to adults weighing personal evidence, consensus, performance, and the costs of finding out for themselves.

Reading
7 of 9
Trust in Testimony: Children’s Use of True and False Statements
Koenig, M. A., Clément, F., & Harris, P. L. (2004). Trust in testimony: Children’s use of true and false statements. Psychological Science, 15(10), 694–698. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00742.x
Landmark empirical study · Methodological contribution · Accessible · Full work: 5 pages
Compare familiar-object judgments with novel-label choices, then check the whole-sample result against the subgroups defined by explicit reliability judgments.
Why you’re reading it. Treat source evaluation as something to measure separately from accepting new information.
A question to consider. Why does the association between recognizing the accurate speaker and choosing that speaker’s labels fail to show that explicit recognition causes selective trust?
Reading
8 of 9
The Evolutionary Basis of Human Social Learning
Morgan, T. J. H., Rendell, L. E., Ehn, M., Hoppitt, W., & Laland, K. N. (2012). The evolutionary basis of human social learning. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279(1729), 653–662. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.1172
Methodological contribution · Landmark empirical study · Challenging · Full work: 10 pages
Track the two ways of measuring information use and how several influences combine in Figures 1 and 2. Keep improved payoff in these tasks distinct from an explanation of evolutionary origins.
Why you’re reading it. Extend selective learning beyond a single trustworthy speaker to the interaction between personal confidence, information quality, and cost.
A question to consider. Would a tendency to follow a majority have the same value when people independently check evidence and when everyone repeats one original source? Explain what additional information you need.

Unit 5 of 5

Can one learning rule explain the pattern?

The closing review revisits mechanisms, development, and the value of using others’ information. It makes disagreements explicit and shows why an individual may combine several strategies. Use it to distinguish an account of how learning occurs from an account of when that learning is useful or how a behavior spreads.

Reading
9 of 9
Social Learning Strategies: Bridge-Building Between Fields
Kendal, R. L., Boogert, N. J., Rendell, L., Laland, K. N., Webster, M., & Jones, P. L. (2018). Social learning strategies: Bridge-building between fields. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(7), 651–665. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2018.04.003
Major synthesis · Critical reappraisal · Moderate · Full work: 15 pages
Compare Box 1 with Heyes’s opening argument. Use the discussion of flexible strategies and population patterns to revisit what the preceding experiments can and cannot distinguish.
Why you’re reading it. Integrate the path without treating all social learning as either imitation or a single special-purpose faculty.
A question to consider. Choose one earlier finding and write two plausible explanations for it. What new comparison would separate them, and would it address mechanism, development, or adaptive value?

Scope and omissions

The central question is how information supplied by others contributes to acquisition and its expression. The path covers observation, sensory cues, modeled consequences, imitation and emulation, communicative instruction, testimony, and selective information use. It connects conceptual arguments with experiments and a cross-disciplinary synthesis.

Several human experiments concern children in particular educational or museum settings, and the adult experiments draw heavily on one university population. They do not represent the full diversity of learning in families, workplaces, or communities. The optional work by Rogoff and colleagues broadens the discussion to participation in shared activities and differences in how learning is organized.

Social pressure, persuasion, group identity, cooperation, and the population dynamics of cumulative culture have larger literatures that belong in neighboring paths. They appear here only where needed to distinguish sources or interpretations of learning. Detailed neural models, the acquisition of language itself, and classroom intervention design are also beyond this syllabus. None of the selected demonstrations supplies a general prescription for education or behavior change.

Synthesis

Other people offer several routes to knowledge: their actions direct attention, demonstrate possibilities, reveal consequences, and carry intentions that a learner may interpret. Acquiring this information and expressing it are different achievements. Imitation, learning about outcomes, instruction, and testimony require distinct comparisons. Trust becomes a further question about a source's accuracy, the learner's confidence, and whether apparently shared information is independent.

Imagine a newcomer learning to operate unfamiliar equipment. They see an experienced colleague perform a sequence, hear one feature explained, and notice that the rest of the group follows the same procedure. Some steps work, some may be unnecessary, and the colleague has not demonstrated every function.

Develop an account of what the newcomer might learn. Separate attention to an object, copying actions, learning about outcomes, and interpreting a lesson. Specify how you would assess acquisition when incentives to perform differ. Then explain how evidence about the colleague’s accuracy, the learner’s own confidence, and the independence of the group’s information could alter whose advice is used.

Finish with a discriminating comparison. State two explanations that predict the same behavior in the original situation, change one relevant feature, and describe the result that would distinguish them. Identify what would remain uncertain about generalization to other learners, tasks, or settings. A useful explanation makes those limits visible.

For more on direct experience, How Do We Learn What Predicts What? develops the evidence for predictive learning, and How Do Consequences Shape Action? examines action–outcome relations and habits. Return to the Learning & Behavior area to choose another reading path.

Continue with How Does Practice Build Skill? to examine what happens as learners practice for themselves. It connects feedback, the arrangement of practice, and repeated or varied experience to retention, automaticity, and transfer.