Literature DB >> 27530404

Response-specific effects in a joint action task: social inhibition of return effects do not emerge when observed and executed actions are different.

Joseph Manzone1,2, Geoff G Cole3, Paul A Skarratt4, Timothy N Welsh5.   

Abstract

Although the inhibition of return (IOR) effect is primarily studied when people act individually, IOR is also observed in social environments where a person observes a partner's response before executing their own response (social or sIOR). Specifically, an observer takes longer to initiate a response to a target at a location that another individual has just responded to than to another location. The present study was conducted to determine if sIOR emerges when two individuals execute different actions-one participant executed keypress responses and the other completed aiming movements to the same set of stimuli. The two conditions in the present experiment were designed to separate the effects of observing a co-actor's target information from observing their subsequent response. In the Full Vision condition, observers saw both the target stimuli and the response of the partner. In the Partial Vision condition, observers witnessed the response of the partner, but did not see the target stimulus or any other potentially attention capturing event at the target location. It was found that, although sIOR emerged in the Full Vision condition, sIOR did not emerge in the Partial Vision condition. These and other previous findings on the impact of action goal on sIOR are discussed with reference to the potential contributions of attention and action co-representation mechanisms to the sIOR effect.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27530404     DOI: 10.1007/s00426-016-0794-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Psychol Res        ISSN: 0340-0727


  44 in total

1.  Action plans used in action observation.

Authors:  J Randall Flanagan; Roland S Johansson
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-08-14       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  A role of goals for social inhibition of return?

Authors:  Markus Janczyk; Timothy N Welsh; Thomas Dolk
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 2.143

3.  Response selection during a joint action task.

Authors:  Matthew Ray; Timothy N Welsh
Journal:  J Mot Behav       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 1.328

4.  Before, during and after you disappear: aspects of timing and dynamic updating of the real-time action simulation of human motions.

Authors:  Jim Parkinson; Anne Springer; Wolfgang Prinz
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2012-02-15

5.  Does Joe influence Fred's action? Inhibition of return across different nervous systems.

Authors:  Timothy N Welsh; Digby Elliott; J Greg Anson; Victoria Dhillon; Daniel J Weeks; James L Lyons; Romeo Chua
Journal:  Neurosci Lett       Date:  2005-09-09       Impact factor: 3.046

6.  Interplay between action and movement intentions during social interaction.

Authors:  Sasha Ondobaka; Floris P de Lange; Roger D Newman-Norlund; Michael Wiemers; Harold Bekkering
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-12-08

7.  Inhibition of return in cue-target and target-target tasks.

Authors:  Timothy N Welsh; Jay Pratt
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2006-04-08       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Seeing the world through another person's eyes: simulating selective attention via action observation.

Authors:  Alexandra Frischen; Daniel Loach; Steven P Tipper
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2009-03-17

9.  Factors that affect action possibility judgments: the assumed abilities of other people.

Authors:  Timothy N Welsh; Lokman Wong; Sanjay Chandrasekharan
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2013-05-02

10.  Does Joe influence Fred's action? Not if Fred has autism spectrum disorder.

Authors:  Timothy N Welsh; Matthew C Ray; Daniel J Weeks; Deborah Dewey; Digby Elliott
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2008-11-12       Impact factor: 3.252

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.