Imitation sounds simple, the copycat game that drives siblings mad, but it turns out to be one of the most foundational things a nervous system does. This episode traces it from a newborn matching a parent’s tongue, through the line where copying tips from connecting into irritating, up to emulation: doing the thing in your own way. It is also a quiet master class in why so many skills, praxis, language, even your own therapeutic style, are built on it.
We finally dive into a thread that has run through nearly every episode: imitation. Tracy frames it as deeply developmental before it is neurological, the way human beings, as social learners, acquire skill and stay connected. We move through the levels, from unconscious mimicry and emotional contagion, the newborn matching a parent’s face, to true imitation with a means-ends goal, to emulation, where you grasp someone’s intention and achieve it in your own way. The line where copying turns from charming and safe into icky and irritating, it turns out, is the moment it becomes a deliberate, goalless copy.
From there it gets clinical. Tracy connects imitation to praxis and sensory discrimination, and Cory and Michelle work through two kids who look opposite, the one who must form the letter A exactly your way, and the one who shrugs and does it his own way, and realise both can share the same underlying gap, weak discrimination, body schema or body-based working memory, expressed as different coping. We land on imitation as a conduit capacity: rarely the thing itself, but the route into social connection, language, mastery over gravity, or a ball skill, and why following the child’s lead is what supplies the motivational glue that pulls sensory and motor together.
Lightly edited for readability. Speaker labels and chapter markers match the published episode.
Michelle: Welcome to episode 12, where today we are going to deep dive into imitation. I am so excited. Hello, Cory.
Cory: Hey Michelle, how are you doing? Hey Tracy.
Tracy: Hey you guys, so excited to be here to talk about imitation, a topic I find deeply interesting, compelling and amazingly clinically relevant. I cannot wait to hear your thoughts and share this conversation.
Michelle: We have referenced it quite a few times across the episodes. We started with praxis, we talked about it in regulation and the building of social capacities, and in executive functioning. So it really is huge, and we decided today is the day to dive in. What is imitation? What underpins it, the capacities that allow it to unfold? What purpose does it serve? And when it is not firing up so well, why might that be, and what can we do about it? When I think about imitation and the purpose it serves, I have this image of little people, babies even, fascinated in their carer, watching their lips move, compelled to do the same. It burgeons into peekaboo games, which initially do not have a context, driven by being with another and copying without a real schema. It is social and motor planning, with all the things underneath it, but perhaps driven by the social-ness of it. How do you think about imitation, Cory?
Cory: It is funny, because if someone says imitation, my automatic response does not go to the depth of little babies, though that is such a good example. What got triggered for me was being a little kid when you really want to annoy your sibling, or they want to annoy you, and they start copying you, stop copying me, and they go, stop copying me, and you are so annoyed. So I was thinking of imitation like that, where you literally do the exact thing the other person is doing. Which is why I am excited to talk about this today, because I know it is neurologically so much more complex than that. It is a neurological concept we are talking about, right, Tracy?
Tracy: It is a neurological concept, but even before that, it is such a deeply developmental concept. In a lot of developmental psychology theories, imitation comes up, and in a lot of our treatment approaches the idea of modelling or direct imitation is pretty infused into the intervention. That is a reflection of the fact that, as human beings, we use imitation as a mechanism of learning and acquiring skill, because we are social learners. And it is that social bit, where imitation is also a really fundamental way we connect, share experience, understand and observe experience. There are so many layers to the way imitation is part and parcel of our social-ness. It is so intertwined into all those layers that you can take it for granted, because people just imitate, we just do that. When you are with people you get in sync with them, you match them. If you go to a gathering, a solemn event or a celebration, you notice people start to match each other in posture, gestures, word choices, so many layers. It is an inherent quality, easy to overlook, but as soon as you say, let’s talk about imitation, it is, whoa, there are so many layers.
Michelle: When you speak about that, I have that experience, and in some podcasts we have used one word, exquisite, intuitive, where one of us says it and we all end up using our hands and similar words, syncing up. It is a bit pro-social. It makes me wonder if there is some not-conscious syncing up of people that serves a pro-social reason, that if we all start to approach and look similar, it signals some safety.
Cory: Like Tracy is saying, we are social beings, so it makes sense that this helps us connect with fellow human beings, and that was a key way we would stay safe, to get in sync with the people around us and be part of the group.
Tracy: That is right. In some of the deep developmental psychology around this, Malinda Carpenter comes to mind, Andy Meltzoff, and Jacqueline Nadel, a French researcher who studies imitation. A lot of Malinda Carpenter’s work, in non-human primates and in children, is that we have this push to recognise the familiar other. We do that through imitation circuits, mirror neuron circuits and sensory-motor circuits that let us notice similarity and difference, and we want to find safe, familiar similarity to establish our ground. So it has this protective quality, a foundation of, I see you, I recognise you, you are like me, you move at the same pace and for the same purposes, you react with your emotion the way I might. There is familiarity, affiliation and safety in all of that. Then we start to recognise that we can lead and follow each other, and that if I follow you, I might learn something, and we might co-create something, maybe for survival. So imitation has played a critical role in our evolution as a species. For our purposes, it is good to start thinking about how, when we say the word imitation, it is not one thing.
Tracy: In the deeper science they deconstruct imitation into lots of bits and parts. In your own experience, you know there is a difference between mirroring or just mimicking somebody, versus matching them and learning alongside and sharing the action, which is more technically imitation. And then when you catch the meaning and expand on it and make it your own, that goes to a higher level technically referred to as emulation. So you have a span, from almost unconscious mimicry that is more emotional, sensory and motor in nature. There were those early Meltzoff and Moore studies, landmark studies that looked at babies just several days old: if they are with a safe, familiar carer, usually a parent, and the parent makes a facial expression, opening their mouth, moving their eyebrows, lips or tongue, the baby matches it. It feels like a magical moment, part of attachment and bonding.
Michelle: So magical. I just matched your eyebrows then.
Cory: Same. As Tracy was moving her eyebrows and opening her mouth, both Michelle and I were doing that thing with you.
Tracy: When we are in sync, you cannot help but imitate, and when you catch yourself and do not want to, you have to actively inhibit the response, because of the neurological mechanism that supports it.
Tracy: That mirror neuron system, we can talk more or less about it today, but we do have neural mechanisms that activate. So when you raise your eyebrows, your brain, seeing what is happening, at some point makes you do the action. What is also funny is that through intermodal or crossmodal functions, which is how the psychologists talk about it, and we talk about as intersensory integration, even just listening to our words there is a crossmodal match. People may be lifting their eyebrows just when we say it, because you can feel the intention.
Cory: So auditorily, people might only be getting the words, but they can feel the motor intention purely through the auditory information, that intermodal matching.
Michelle: And when you become aware you are copying someone you admire, like you, Tracy, and think, oh, this is the next level, I notice I consciously have to work against copying somebody. I feel I need to disconnect and pull out of that to find my own regulation, my own Michelle-ness, come back to me, and then I lean into it again. But pretty quickly, if it is someone I adore, you are doing it again. So there is an automaticity to it, and you have to work against that neurology unfolding and really disconnect to sync back in.
Cory: My experience of that is travelling overseas and trying not to accidentally adopt the accent. When I was in Britain I could feel myself doing it, and then, I am so sorry, I am not trying to imitate you. So that was my next question, Tracy: when does it turn, what qualities seem to lack, when it goes from something synchronous to something abrasive or irritating?
Cory: What are the key elements that move it from familiarity and safety to, this is really annoying, stop copying me? It is probably a fine line, but they are really different experiences.
Tracy: The change is a little fluid, but in that artificial demarcation between levels of imitative capacity, in unconscious mimicry, that level is really driven by sensory-motor contagion, and it always has an affective tone. It is an emotional contagion function, there are whole books on emotional contagion and social mimicry.
Michelle: Is that what underlies little people opening their mouth the same way their daddy does? There is no executive functioning, perhaps a motivational bias to be like Daddy. Is that what that is?
Tracy: That is right, and I love that you notice that at that developmental stage the goal is probably to be like the person you are with. If that is the authentic goal, it is not very irritating, in fact it is quite charming and captivating. But there is this idea of a goal connected to imitation. The middle state, true imitation, has a means-ends relationship: you have a goal, and you use an action, a facial, verbal or gestural expression, because from here I get to there. Little babies have a different kind of goal than you and I do, because we have far higher levels of cognition, language and experience, so the goal for a baby is different, and it does not feel irritating. But if it is us just imitating each other on purpose, it would start to be irritating pretty fast, versus the emotional contagion that just happens because we are in sync. We match each other in intonation, gestures, shoulder shrugs, eyebrow raises, head nods, glances, joint attention, all unconsciously. As soon as we do it on purpose with a goal, it is, why are you doing that?
Michelle: It feels icky, like a withdraw, hang on, you just messed with what we had then.
Cory: That helps me clarify where it goes from pure mimicry, emotionally driven around contagion, I catch onto that and give it back to tell you I am with you, into doing it on purpose to annoy. So the goal developmentally for the baby is to be liked, because we want to bond and connect with our caregiver, not in a cognitive way, just wired in. So what is after that? I am thinking of a three-month-old, where they have the postural stability to stay with their caregiver, find their midline, orient and organise, and actively give a motor response that reflects what they are seeing. So much in just that part, the perceiving the face, seeing it, replicating it, the staying with, the attention. What is the goal of imitation for the next developmental phase?
Tracy: It is skill development, and a richer, deeper level of social connection. Where the three-day-old is unconsciously mimicking the tongue movement, by three months the baby is, do it again, because that was cool, and do it again, because I want to refine what I am doing and match you even more. I have a three-month-old granddaughter, and I watched a lot of imitative play over the weekend. If you stick your tongue out far, she sticks her tongue out and tries to do it far, really getting that intermodal matching, knowing whether it is my lips or my tongue moving, and she wants to repeat it, and then share the joyful hilarity that it just happened. Then she starts to have reciprocity, she imitates you and expects you to imitate her, so it has a return quality, a much more sophisticated social exchange.
Michelle: Because she works out that she can initiate it, not just follow, she has agency.
Cory: You thought exactly the same thing I did, Michelle, which is that this is the start of praxis, the fact that she can discriminate lips to tongue to refine the skill.
Michelle: And even the timing of it, in relation to you. You do it, then I do it, the tongue goes out, she juts the chin to get it further, then back in, then it is your turn. That is the sequence and timing of praxis.
Cory: I love that we got to praxis so quickly, even developmentally so early, because this just gets more and more complex as we move through the developmental phases. You were talking about emulation, Tracy, as a higher-level capacity of imitation. Can we flesh that out, emulation and praxis?
Tracy: As a paediatric OT with the sensory integration framework as such a foundation, I would think of emulation and praxis almost as similar processes. In the developmental psychology literature, emulation is really where you understand the means-ends goal: when you see a person do an action, you understand their intention, and you want to achieve the same goal, but you do not have to do it the same way. So when we learn from each other, I am going to show you how to climb a rock wall, or knit, or draw a flower. If you were just imitating, you would be really constrained trying to do it exactly the way I did, which makes it harder. Instead you watch and observe, so modelling is best for kids when they have the capacity of emulation, where they see what we are doing and understand, oh, when I hold that pin on the wall and put my foot there, that pushes me up, but now I get to use my own body mechanics in the way that feels right to me. If you watch kids struggling with praxis, they can get their needle stuck, the concept we used last time for therapists, where they overly imitate, get stuck doing it exactly the way you did, and are not authentic to their own biosocial system, their own muscle tone or alignment. So how we use praxis is we model the intention and the means-ends goal, but not exactly, in a way that matches how our body, mind and agency work. Emulation is the higher-level skill where we repeat the thing in our own way. If we get stuck at any level, like in development, the higher-level capacities come about because of the lower, so when you struggle at the higher level you slide back down to the lower. I think about dancing. I never trained as a dancer, but I have a friend who is phenomenal. At first I am captivated by his affect and joy of movement, so that is what I am mimicking, then I mimic the action and move into imitation, and it might take me until the last four beats of the song to get to, okay, I have got it, I am going to do my own thing. It is that cycle.
Cory: I actually thought about perfectionism, those kids who have to do it the exact way it is presented. If I wrote the letter A a certain way and they copy, a little wobble can throw them off. Is that because they have lost the end goal of just writing the letter A, and it is okay that it is an A, your A and not Cory’s A?
Tracy: Totally. Because emotional contagion is part of mimicry, which slides into imitation, then emulation, when kids struggle with that higher-level capacity you see them slide back down to the lower levels. So what seems like perfectionism is really affectively charged, they are in it emotionally, connected to the means-ends goal, but not quite ready to make it their own, so they insist on imitation, I have to do it that way. It is maybe less perfectionism and more a product of how imitation and praxis are limiting. When you cannot really own it, it is frustrating, and you want it exactly right. It is also interesting because all of this is based back in sensory discrimination, being able to know, here is how I move, here is how I hold the pencil, here is what the line is like. When kids struggle with praxis, that sensory discrimination foundation is likely weak, so holding onto the perfect execution gives a sense of security when you cannot generate it from your own sensory-motor system.
Michelle: But the flip can happen. I am thinking of a little kiddo who does not have great sensory discrimination. My tendency would be to imitate, then add my flavour, like I am learning yoga at the moment, I imitate and then think, oh yeah, I have got that, and do my own thing. But because his sensory discrimination is not great and he does not pick up his errors so well, he tends towards, I am just going to do it my way, first, rather than fine-tuning it. He adapts by going, I see what you are doing but I cannot actually do it, so I am just going to do it my way over here.
Cory: I am picturing the same kids, because they know that whatever is presented is, for their own capacity, too hard. They cannot get the midline organisation, or the planning, timing and sequencing, and they know it just from watching. He sounds invested in doing and being with you, wanting to play.
Michelle: He wants the ball to bounce off his knee like I might, and it is, I am not going to stand on one foot and put my hands on my hips, I will do it my way. So is that where you do not get the errors picked up? Without enough lean into imitation, error detection and repeating, you do not get the skilful development, and too much, I am just going to do it my way, does not lead to enough accuracy.
Tracy: For different kids it would be a different reason. In the process of praxis, you have, here is my idea, and very often the idea comes from deferred imitation: I saw people throwing balls and I want to be a ball thrower. Sometimes ideation comes from pure creativity, but most of the time from deferred imitation. There is an internal representation, a schema you hold onto as the comparison, so when you do the act you plan, execute, then monitor against what you were trying to do. If the thing you did does not match what you thought, which is true for writing the letter A or balancing, some kids respond by, I have to be exactly how my idea was. Others are, I am never going to get that idea, so I will keep randomly changing it, because it is too hard to get from idea to matching the copy to get the comparison data. That is often true for kids with really weak body schema, who do not get good feedback, or really poor body-based working memory, where they think they are doing the act but do not actually remember what they were trying to do, so they change it. Those kids can look more impulsive, random and less able to repeat skilful action. We all only improve through repetition and error correction. So for different kids it is different, and one of every clinician’s journeys is to fine-tune your observations, to tune into what is driving what seems like random or disorganised behaviour. When you observe through this lens and ask, what is interrupting imitation, because imitation is such a robust skill that if it is not available in a full way for a child, you wonder why, where is that difficulty coming from, and then we can work to fill in the gaps.
Cory: I was wondering about the two kids we thought of: mine wants to write the A exactly the same way, yours is, I cannot get that, so I am going to do it this way. It is almost like those two kids could have a similar underlying gap, but the way they have coped or responded is a different behaviour. Earlier I thought, is it just not investment in the end goal, but your child is totally invested in the end goal, and so is the other. So the responses, the ways they cope with the gap of not having the discrimination and praxis to do the end goal, produce different behaviours. It is not always going to be one behaviour that reflects a similar underlying challenge.
Tracy: That is exactly right. That is why we do not want to focus on the behaviour, we want to focus on the underpinning, because that is how we improve it. Dyspraxia and apraxia show up in children and adults in all kinds of varieties.
Michelle: For me, the capacity of imitation illustrates the Spirit model, because it requires all the different domains to be available: the postural system, stability in the core, neck, head and eyes to focus on the thing; regulation and that burgeoning social capacity, being with another and staying with another and syncing physiologically, and doing it long enough to get the information you need; the motor planning, praxis; the executive function of attention, I am going to stay with you attentionally; and the working memory, the visual aspect, the error detection, the feedback and repeating. It requires all those underlying capacities.
Cory: It is so true, because in the examples today we have danced across literally every area we have talked about. In the three-month-old babies, imitation contributes to bonding, so we started with social-emotional development. But a three-month-old has also done postural development and built their capacity to regulate, so we have danced across all the lower-route systems around this one thing, imitation. Then suddenly we jump up into praxis and executive functions, because now if I am Michelle’s little friend in the treatment room, I have to organise and shift and sustain my attention on Michelle to take in the activity, then organise my own body and body schema in planning to replicate it. It is mind-blowing.
[1:01:59] Clinical application: observing and supporting imitation
Cory: If I think about emulation of another therapist: you see the way they got the child to the goal, did whatever was in their therapeutic toolbox to get the child to an adaptive capacity. You can go, I see how they got there, and I can emulate that in a different way that matches me as a therapist. When you first start treating, you almost start with imitation, you imitate what other therapists do before you have the whole concept of the bits and parts that get you to the end goal. As you build depth in clinical knowledge and skill, you can see, I know where the end goal is, but I do not have to get there the same way Michelle does, because I have the embodiment of the schema.
Tracy: That is exactly right. When you first learn a handling technique, you learn it through imitation, but right away how you are in touch contact with the child, your muscle tone, the size of your hand, is different, so the physical properties you bring promote your own own-ness. When we say embodied, we want each of us to feel we can accomplish the meaningful things in our lives. When you try to imitate the other person, you start to feel, I cannot do it the way you are doing it because it does not feel like me, so there is a push to emulate, to use praxis and your relationship with whoever you are interacting with, not to imitate rotely, because it does not feel authentic.
Michelle: I am interested in this idea of emulation, because I was a little perfectionist girl who repeated and repeated, and it has taken me until 40 to start emulating, coming into the fullness of myself and realising I can be perfectly imperfect. I am sure others move into that developmental availability before 40.
Tracy: For all of us there is probably a higher level of imitation that is authentic expression of your own self-ness, a later developmental skill we all struggle to come to. Little kids start to understand goal and do things in their own way even towards the end of the first year, but really around 18 months you see a big shift, and it gets richer and deeper through the rest of our lives. Piaget talked about deferred imitation, and you see it in preschoolers becoming richer, where they do not just imitate but make it their own. Little preschoolers in the sandbox, one digging like a dump truck, one like an animal, one in their own way, all imitating the same skill but adding the narrative, story and pretend. So through language and cognitive development emulation gets richer, but language and cognitive development depend on imitation. So in early developmental curriculum for kids who struggle, imitation is often a focus, but the problem is it can be really inauthentic, drilling kids to clap your hands because I clapped my hands on command, which is not authentic imitation. There is a big focus now in good intervention to make it more play-based, more about the means-ends goal: what are we sharing, what are we doing together, how does your body move, and why, and look what happens when we do this together. In imitation you need a partner, the source material you are copying. The other interesting thing in early development is that if I raise my eyebrows being silly and a child does it back, they do not have to see their own face to match it, that is the contagion, and that is how mimicry helps build sensory discrimination. It is really different than doing something with your hands that you can see, where I can monitor, observe and modify and become more skilful. So there is cool research on how different imitation skills are if you can see what you are imitating versus if you cannot.
Cory: I was just thinking about the kids who love the mirror, is that the whole, I can see it so I can figure it out, related back to body schema discrimination? If I do not have great schema or somatosensory feedback, but I can visually see it, I can sort of get those things to come together, that crossmodal matching.
Tracy: That is exactly right.
Michelle: We also have to give them some space to do that, the reciprocal component. There is that stage where, like my own kids, it is, I do it, I do it, they want to dress themselves. So it is, I do it and I am going to do it with my flavour, and we need to give the space, in real life and in therapy, to allow them to add their flavour, so we are not doing real splinter-skill, copy me to a T. There is a sense of, yeah, you can do it, you try it now, your turn. Depending on the goal, if it is really initial skill development, you might allow the buttons not quite done up, and eventually, when they have that, I do it with my flavour and more motivational drive, the buttons get done up in the correct order.
Cory: Even more basically, in the therapy space it can be simpler than the buttons. They start to figure out how to move their face to match your face, and we slow ourselves down for the systems to come together for the response to happen. I wait, I give ten seconds, however long your nervous system needs to sync up your somatosensory discrimination with your motor action system to plan how to move your face like me, so the game can continue.
Michelle: I even went further back, to the episode on regulation and the beginning of social capacities, where I was with that little kiddo just trying to sync and regulate. I was slowing my breath rate, we were not yet at joint attention, so I really needed to imitate, slow down and allow him to sync physiologically with me, that co-regulation piece, tune down and stay with and hang on before we even had joint attention.
Cory: It is physiological imitation, before we even get going. In treatment, if you have a kid who is not very robust in their ability to plan out and imitate the action in the way you are, it is so hard to have a set way of approaching that. In one example, Michelle’s kid has the idea of the game but cannot figure out how to move their body, yet has high enough cognition that you get curious, I wonder if we could do it this way, or let’s video it and watch ourselves. In a whole other situation, you have a child who is just starting to sustain their oculomotor control and midline enough to stay with you. In that moment I am not going to talk, because there is no language here, I am going to tune myself up or down depending on how much time you need to sync your somatosensory system with your motor action planning and praxis, so you can do the end goal I can see you want to do but your capacity is still emerging in. I have to give you the time and space and set you up to have success.
Tracy: That is exactly right. For some kids it just takes a long time for your presence to be salient enough that, when you have a shared exchange that matches, that salience resonates and is strong enough. In some of the really early work there is a focus on increasing salience, reducing the competition of other things so you are more available, staying co-regulated enough that as you increase your action, or your action on an object of shared meaning, or your affective tone, the child is, oh, that was interesting. That orienting response, that was interesting, has to be present for imitation to ever even be possible. So we go right back to foundational sensory discrimination, orientation and shared moments of salience, and from interest we build into imitation. For some kids that is a slow journey.
Cory: It is fascinating that it all relies on the ability to tune in and orient and organise my nervous system to find that thing meaningful, to then go, oh, I think I want to try doing that the way you did. In the social system we come wired to find our parent or carer interesting from the get-go, so we want to get in sync and imitate. When that gets disrupted, for whatever reason, it lays up underneath so many things.
Michelle: For so many reasons, the infant’s individual differences and profile, the environment, the carer’s availability for nurturance. It is internal and external forces that need to come together so two people who are available even have the possibility.
Cory: And it is cool that we get to play around with the different components in treatment. If the sensory-motor piece is hardest, so loud unexpected sounds disrupt it, you figure out how to reduce your tone of voice. If their postural tone is poor, how do I support their tone to allow the thing to come together. If it is organising the spatial envelope, how do I get them into a space that allows it. One of my favourite mentors says, if it does not work, it is an assessment, if it works, it is treatment. You are always figuring out what works and what changes let the capacity emerge.
[1:05:31] Wrap-up
Tracy: The invitation to do this deeper clinical reasoning, really think developmentally. If imitation is this conduit capacity, essential for every other thing we develop, you want to think about what is lower than imitation, what might be disrupting it, but also, in the higher direction, what connects to that child’s developing profile. For one child, imitation for social interaction; for another, for sound generation, vocal quality and eventually talking; for another, to have mastery over gravity; for another, to play with that ball. So it is not just, my body does what your body does, it is, my body can do what your body does for this cool reason. Sometimes we fill things in by going lower, maybe it is the muscle tone making it hard; for another child with low muscle tone, it could be juicing them up that ball skills are fun. So imitation is the conduit, but it is not always the thing we are actually practising.
Michelle: That makes sense. So, Trace, this underlies the principle of following the child’s lead. It is not that we are racing around the room, it is that it provides the motivational pull that might elevate them into the next capacity, not because we want to be nice and let them be the boss of the room.
Cory: It comes back to the affective tone and motivational system being the glue between the motor and sensory systems, sometimes pulling those two together just because I am so interested in this thing. And I assume, Tracy, that doing that builds the neural pathways around those capacities, to maybe generalise across more environments?
Tracy: Absolutely. Sally Rogers, a mentor of mine for a long time, would often say that sensory-motor skills are one of the most vital active ingredients of imitation, but it is the affective connection that is the reason you do it. That is probably the perfect place to wrap up.
Cory: We have loved it, we have gotten deep and engaged, and we hope you found it wonderfully stimulating. We cannot wait to talk to everyone next time. Thanks, Trace.
Tracy: Bye, take care.
And that’s a wrap on today’s episode of Spirited Conversations. We hope this sparks something for you, whether it’s a new clinical idea, a fresh perspective, or just the reminder that you are definitely not alone in this work. If this conversation resonated, we would love for you to share it with anyone on their own learning journey. You can find information about the podcast on our website, and you can join us in the courses and communities the Developmental FX team have put together at developmentalfx.org. And if you’re enjoying listening, please subscribe or leave a review, it genuinely helps more people find us. Until next time, keep the conversations spirited!