Literature DB >> 26569336

Automatic imitation? Imitative compatibility affects responses at high perceptual load.

Caroline Catmur1.   

Abstract

Imitation involves matching the visual representation of another's action onto the observer's own motor program for that action. However, there has been some debate regarding the extent to which imitation is "automatic"-that is, occurs without attention. Participants performed a perceptual load task in which images of finger movements were presented as distractors. Responses to target letter stimuli were performed via finger movements that could be imitatively compatible (requiring the same finger movement) or incompatible with the distractor movements: In this common stimulus-response compatibility manipulation, the stimulus set comprises images of the response movements, producing an imitative compatibility effect. Attention to the distractor movements was manipulated by altering perceptual load through increasing the number of nontarget letter stimuli. If imitation requires attention, then at high perceptual load, imitative compatibility should not affect response times. In contrast, imitative compatibility influenced response times at high perceptual load, demonstrating that distractor movements were processed. However, the compatibility effect was reversed, suggesting that longer response times at high perceptual load tap into an inhibitory stage of distractor movement processing. A follow-up experiment manipulating temporal delay between targets and distractor movements supported this explanation. Further experiments confirmed that nonmovement distractor stimuli in the same configuration produced standard perceptual load effects and that results were not solely due to effector compatibility. These data suggest that imitation can occur without attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26569336     DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000166

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


  6 in total

1.  Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation.

Authors:  David Dignath; Paul Lotze-Hermes; Harry Farmer; Roland Pfister
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2017-03-10

Review 2.  Can automaticity be verified utilizing a perceptual load manipulation?

Authors:  Hanna Benoni
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2018-12

3.  Imitation of action-effects increases social affiliation.

Authors:  David Dignath; Gregory Born; Andreas Eder; Sascha Topolinski; Roland Pfister
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2020-07-14

4.  Overt orienting of spatial attention and corticospinal excitability during action observation are unrelated.

Authors:  Sonia Betti; Umberto Castiello; Silvia Guerra; Luisa Sartori
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-03-20       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Intentional synchronisation affects automatic imitation and source memory.

Authors:  Liam Cross; Gray Atherton; Natalie Sebanz
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Group Dynamics in Automatic Imitation.

Authors:  Ilka H Gleibs; Neil Wilson; Geetha Reddy; Caroline Catmur
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-09-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.