Literature DB >> 16634666

Imitative response tendencies following observation of intransitive actions.

Bennett I Bertenthal1, Matthew R Longo, Adam Kosobud.   

Abstract

Clear and unequivocal evidence shows that observation of object affordances or transitive actions facilitates the activation of a compatible response. By contrast, the evidence showing response facilitation following observation of intransitive actions is less conclusive because automatic imitation and spatial compatibility have been confounded. Three experiments tested whether observation of a finger movement (i.e., an intransitive action) in a choice reaction-time task facilitates the corresponding finger movement response because of imitation, a common spatial code, or some combination of both factors. The priming effects of a spatial and an imitative stimulus were tested in combination (Experiment 1), in opposition (Experiment 2), and independently (Experiment 3). Contrary to previous findings, the evidence revealed significant contributions from both automatic imitation and spatial compatibility, but the priming effects from an automatic tendency to imitate declined significantly across a block of trials whereas the effects of spatial compatibility remained constant or increased slightly. These differential effects suggest that priming associated with automatic imitation is mediated by a different regime than priming associated with spatial compatibility.

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16634666     DOI: 10.1037/0096-1523.32.2.210

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform        ISSN: 0096-1523            Impact factor:   3.332


  41 in total

1.  Bidirectional semantic interference between action and speech.

Authors:  Roman Liepelt; Thomas Dolk; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-11-11

2.  Action mirroring and action understanding: an ideomotor and attentional account.

Authors:  Markus Paulus
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-11-06

Review 3.  How does visuomotor priming differ for biological and non-biological stimuli? A review of the evidence.

Authors:  E Gowen; E Poliakoff
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-07

4.  Observation of a finger or an object movement primes imitative responses differentially.

Authors:  M Jonas; K Biermann-Ruben; K Kessler; R Lange; T Bäumer; H R Siebner; A Schnitzler; A Münchau
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-08-31       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Inhibition of imitative behaviour and social cognition.

Authors:  Marcel Brass; Perrine Ruby; Stephanie Spengler
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 6.237

Review 6.  Movements, actions and tool-use actions: an ideomotor approach to imitation.

Authors:  Cristina Massen; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2009-08-27       Impact factor: 6.237

7.  Automatic imitation in a strategic context: players of rock-paper-scissors imitate opponents' gestures.

Authors:  Richard Cook; Geoffrey Bird; Gabriele Lünser; Steffen Huck; Cecilia Heyes
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2011-07-20       Impact factor: 5.349

8.  The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict.

Authors:  Eliane Deschrijver; Jan R Wiersema; Marcel Brass
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 3.282

9.  Orthogonal-compatibility effects confound automatic imitation: implications for measuring self-other distinction.

Authors:  Daniel Joel Shaw; Kristína Czekóová; Michaela Porubanová
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2016-10-17

10.  Characteristics of motor resonance predict the pattern of flash-lag effects for biological motion.

Authors:  Klaus Kessler; Lucy Gordon; Kari Cessford; Martin Lages
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2010-01-07       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.