Skip to main content

Welkom bij Scalda & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

Scalda heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen.Je kunt de producten hieronder links aanschaffen en rechts inloggen.

Registreer

Schaf de BSL Academy aan: 

BSL Academy mbo AG

Eenmaal aangeschaft kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met Jan van der Velden.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Top
Gepubliceerd in:

01-09-2010 | Original Article

Influence of stimulus–response assignment on the joint-action correspondence effect

Auteurs: Melanie Y. Lam, Romeo Chua

Gepubliceerd in: Psychological Research | Uitgave 5/2010

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

Sebanz et al. (Cognition 88:B11–B21, 2003) have shown that spatial correspondence effects are observed even when the two-choice reaction time task is distributed between two people, such that each person is assigned only one of two possible stimulus–response (S–R) pairings. The effect is similar to when one person is assigned and responds to both S–R pairings. These results have been taken to suggest that two people performing a complementary task co-represent each other’s response alternatives. In our experiment, we examined performance when paired participants responded to the same S–R alternative. We reasoned that co-representation would be of little advantage as the task alternatives would be the same for both participants. Correspondence effects were absent when paired participants responded to the same S–R alternative but emerged when they responded to different alternatives.
Voetnoten
1
Guagnano et al. (2009) have recently shown that a similar spatial correspondence effect may also be obtained in a situation in which two participants simultaneously, but independently, perform non-complementary simple RT tasks. These authors propose that when the participants perform a non-collaborative task, the presence of between-person spatial correspondence effects may be a result of the spatial coding induced by the presence of a second participant. That is, the presence of another person might provide a reference for the spatial coding of one’s own action. Correspondence effects are then thought to arise as a result of this spatial coding, and not necessarily from the shared representation of the other person’s actions.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377.CrossRefPubMed Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2004). A response-discrimination account of the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 365–377.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2009). Transfer of response codes from choice-response to go/no-go tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1216–1235.CrossRefPubMed Ansorge, U., & Wühr, P. (2009). Transfer of response codes from choice-response to go/no-go tasks. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62, 1216–1235.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Knoblich, G., & Sebanz, N. (2006). The social nature of perception and action. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 99–104.CrossRef Knoblich, G., & Sebanz, N. (2006). The social nature of perception and action. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 99–104.CrossRef
go back to reference Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., & Knoblich, G. (2006). Joint actions: bodies and minds moving together. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 70–76.CrossRefPubMed Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., & Knoblich, G. (2006). Joint actions: bodies and minds moving together. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 70–76.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2003). Representing others’ actions: Just like one’s own? Cognition, 88, B11–B21.CrossRefPubMed Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2003). Representing others’ actions: Just like one’s own? Cognition, 88, B11–B21.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2005a). How two share a task: Corepresenting stimulus–response mappings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 1234–1246.CrossRefPubMed Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2005a). How two share a task: Corepresenting stimulus–response mappings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 1234–1246.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., Stumpf, L., & Prinz, W. (2005b). Far from action blind: Representation of others’ actions in individuals with autism. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 433–454.CrossRef Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., Stumpf, L., & Prinz, W. (2005b). Far from action blind: Representation of others’ actions in individuals with autism. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 22, 433–454.CrossRef
go back to reference Sebanz, N., Rebbechi, D., Knoblich, G., Prinz, W., & Frith, C. D. (2007). Is it really my turn? An event-related fMRI study of task sharing. Social Neuroscience, 2, 81–95.CrossRefPubMed Sebanz, N., Rebbechi, D., Knoblich, G., Prinz, W., & Frith, C. D. (2007). Is it really my turn? An event-related fMRI study of task sharing. Social Neuroscience, 2, 81–95.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions towards the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.CrossRefPubMed Simon, J. R. (1969). Reactions towards the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Tsai, C., & Brass, M. (2007). Does the human motor system simulate Pinocchio’s actions? Coacting with a human hand versus a wooden hand in a dyadic interaction. Psychological Science, 18, 1058–1062.CrossRefPubMed Tsai, C., & Brass, M. (2007). Does the human motor system simulate Pinocchio’s actions? Coacting with a human hand versus a wooden hand in a dyadic interaction. Psychological Science, 18, 1058–1062.CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Tsai, C., Kuo, W., Jing, J., Hung, D., & Tzeng, O. (2006). A common coding framework in self other inter-action. Evidence from a joint action task. Experimental Brain Research, 175, 353–362.CrossRef Tsai, C., Kuo, W., Jing, J., Hung, D., & Tzeng, O. (2006). A common coding framework in self other inter-action. Evidence from a joint action task. Experimental Brain Research, 175, 353–362.CrossRef
go back to reference Welsh, T. N., Higgins, L., Ray, M., & Weeks, D. J. (2007). Seeing vs believing: Is believing sufficient to activate the processes of response co-representation? Human Movement Science, 26, 853–866.CrossRefPubMed Welsh, T. N., Higgins, L., Ray, M., & Weeks, D. J. (2007). Seeing vs believing: Is believing sufficient to activate the processes of response co-representation? Human Movement Science, 26, 853–866.CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Influence of stimulus–response assignment on the joint-action correspondence effect
Auteurs
Melanie Y. Lam
Romeo Chua
Publicatiedatum
01-09-2010
Uitgeverij
Springer-Verlag
Gepubliceerd in
Psychological Research / Uitgave 5/2010
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0269-4