scholarly journals Individual Differences in Children's Corepresentation of Self and Other in Joint Action

2016 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 964-978 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie J. Milward ◽  
Sotaro Kita ◽  
Ian A. Apperly
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Joint Action ◽  
Self And Other

scholarly journals Evolving intentions for social interaction: from entrainment to joint action

2008 ◽  
Vol 363 (1499) ◽  
pp. 2021-2031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Günther Knoblich ◽  
Natalie Sebanz
Keyword(s):  
Social Interaction ◽  
Social Interactions ◽  
Joint Attention ◽  
Joint Action ◽  
Perception And Action ◽  
Intentional Action ◽  
Cultural Learning ◽  
Interpersonal Processes ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Blind Individuals

This article discusses four different scenarios to specify increasingly complex mechanisms that enable increasingly flexible social interactions. The key dimension on which these mechanisms differ is the extent to which organisms are able to process other organisms' intentions and to keep them apart from their own. Drawing on findings from ecological psychology, scenario 1 focuses on entrainment and simultaneous affordance in ‘intentionally blind’ individuals. Scenario 2 discusses how an interface between perception and action allows observers to simulate intentional action in others. Scenario 3 is concerned with shared perceptions, arising through joint attention and the ability to distinguish between self and other. Scenario 4 illustrates how people could form intentions to act together while simultaneously distinguishing between their own and the other's part of a joint action. The final part focuses on how combining the functionality of the four mechanisms can explain different forms of social interactions. It is proposed that basic interpersonal processes are put to service by more advanced functions that support the type of intentionality required to engage in joint action, cultural learning, and communication.

scholarly journals Contribution of self- and other-regarding motives to (dis)honesty

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Anastasia Shuster ◽  
Dino J. Levy
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Neural Responses ◽  
Potential Harm ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Potential Value ◽  
Neural Processes ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Harm To Others ◽  
Potential Losses ◽  
Other Regarding

Abstract Why would people tell the truth when there is an obvious gain in lying and no risk of being caught? Previous work suggests the involvement of two motives, self-interest and regard for others. However, it remains unknown if these motives are related or distinctly contribute to (dis)honesty, and what are the neural instantiations of these motives. Using a modified Message Game task, in which a Sender sends a dishonest (yet profitable) or honest (less profitable) message to a Receiver, we found that these two motives contributed to dishonesty independently. Furthermore, the two motives involve distinct brain networks: the LPFC tracked potential value to self, whereas the rTPJ tracked potential losses to other, and individual differences in motives modulated these neural responses. Finally, activity in the vmPFC represented a balance of the two motives unique to each participant. Taken together, our results suggest that (dis)honest decisions incorporate at least two separate cognitive and neural processes—valuation of potential profits to self and valuation of potential harm to others.

scholarly journals Motor simulation and the coordination of self and other in real-time joint action

2013 ◽  
Vol 9 (8) ◽  
pp. 1062-1068 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giacomo Novembre ◽  
Luca F. Ticini ◽  
Simone Schütz-Bosbach ◽  
Peter E. Keller
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Joint Action ◽  
Motor Simulation ◽  
Self And Other

Beyond stability: Predicting inter‐individual differences in intra‐individual change

1992 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 103-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jens B. Asendorpf
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Developmental Perspective ◽  
Individual Change ◽  
Longitudinal Stability ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Personality Differences ◽  
Overall Stability ◽  
Differential Stability

Demonstration of a high longitudinal stability of inter‐individual diferences in behaviour has been one traditional goal of personality psychology. In recent years, impressively high longitudinal correlations have been reported for self‐and other‐ratings of behaviour in adulthood, indicating a high overall stability of personality differences in that period of development. However, even 5‐year correlations around 0.70 do not exclude major deviations of some of the subjects from this overall stability (i.e. differential stability in the sample). Furthermore, the younger a sample is, the lower will be the longitudinal stability observed, and the less suficient is the explanation of inter‐individual diferences by static traits. This article goes beyond the notion of stability at the sample level by asking from a developmental perspective (a) whether systematic inter‐individual differences in intra‐individual change exist, (b) how they can be assessed, and (c) whether these inter‐individual differences can be explained by characteristics of the person or of the environment.

Avoiding Accidents at the Champagne Reception

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 338-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Pezzulo ◽  
Pierpaolo Iodice ◽  
Francesco Donnarumma ◽  
Haris Dindo ◽  
Günther Knoblich
Keyword(s):  
Joint Action ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
The Other ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Joint Actions

Using a lifting and balancing task, we contrasted two alternative views of planning joint actions: one postulating that joint action involves distinct predictions for self and other, the other postulating that joint action involves coordinated plans between the coactors and reuse of bimanual models. We compared compensatory movements required to keep a tray balanced when 2 participants lifted glasses from each other’s trays at the same time (simultaneous joint action) and when they took turns lifting (sequential joint action). Compared with sequential joint action, simultaneous joint action made it easier to keep the tray balanced. Thus, in keeping with the view that bimanual models are reused for joint action, predicting the timing of their own lifting action helped participants compensate for another person’s lifting action. These results raise the possibility that simultaneous joint actions do not necessarily require distinguishing between one’s own and the coactor’s contributions to the action plan and may afford an agent-neutral stance.

scholarly journals Ndibeer and Ned Ride Again

2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 30-50
Author(s):  
Karen Mary Partridge
Keyword(s):  
Therapeutic Relationship ◽  
Hierarchical Model ◽  
Joint Action ◽  
Coordinated Management Of Meaning ◽  
Active Participant ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Mutual Learning ◽  
Reflexive Space ◽  
Ending Process ◽  
Inner Voices

This article tells a dialogical story and describes a process of mutual learning and embodiment over the course of a long therapeutic relationship. The article maps the development of relationship, between my inner voices, my supervisors and those of my client, where stories of self and other are articulated, elaborated and externalised using the metaphor of a "bundle of treasures".  A self-reflexive process of personal and professional mapping, using the hierarchical model of the Coordinated Management of Meaning, is described.  In a recursive and isomorphic process, supervisory and therapeutic conversations further elaborate these stories, and through joint action, enable the creation of a liminal, reflexive space, a Fifth Province position, a cauldron of creativity where practice-based theory can develop. This process will be illustrated as it arises in the story of relationship and the process of therapy, so this narrative invites the reader to become an active participant in a never-ending process where theory becomes a live metaphor in the quest for being human

scholarly journals Mechanisms and development of self–other distinction in dyads and groups

2016 ◽  
Vol 371 (1686) ◽  
pp. 20150076 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sophie J. Milward ◽  
Natalie Sebanz
Keyword(s):  
Social Cognition ◽  
Joint Action ◽  
Group Versus ◽  
Developmental Research ◽  
Cognitive Domains ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Single Mechanism ◽  
Opinion Piece

This opinion piece offers a commentary on the four papers that address the theme of the development of self and other understanding with a view to highlighting the important contribution of developmental research to understanding of mechanisms of social cognition. We discuss potential mechanisms linking self–other distinction and empathy, implications for grouping motor, affective and cognitive domains under a single mechanism, applications of these accounts for joint action and finally consider self–other distinction in group versus dyadic settings.

scholarly journals Effects of pointing movements on visuospatial working memory in a joint-action condition: Evidence from eye movements

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Divya Bhatia ◽  
Vaishnavi Mohite ◽  
Pietro Spataro ◽  
Clelia Rossi-Arnaud ◽  
Ramesh Kumar Mishra
Keyword(s):  
Joint Action ◽  
Spatial Location ◽  
Visual Observation ◽  
Passive Condition ◽  
Self And Other ◽  
Eye Fixations ◽  
Pointing Movements ◽  
Functional Equivalency ◽  
Representational Level ◽  
Better Than

AbstractPrevious studies showed that (a) performing pointing movements towards to-be-remembered locations enhanced their later recognition, and (b) in a joint-action condition, experimenter-performed pointing movements benefited memory to the same extent as self-performed movements. The present study replicated these findings and additionally recorded participants’ fixations towards studied arrays. Each trial involved the presentation of two consecutive spatial arrays, where each item occupied a different spatial location. The item locations of one array were encoded by mere visual observation (the no-move array), whereas the locations of the other array were encoded by observation plus pointing movements (the move array). Critically, in Experiment 1, participants took turns with the experimenter in pointing towards the move arrays (joint-action condition), while in Experiment 2 pointing was performed only by the experimenter (passive condition). The results showed that the locations of move arrays were recognized better than the locations of no-move arrays in Experiment 1, but not in Experiment 2. The pattern of eye-fixations was in line with behavioral findings, indicating that in Experiment 1, fixations to the locations of move arrays were higher in number and longer in duration than fixations to the locations of no-move arrays, irrespective of the agent who performed the movements. In contrast, no differences emerged in Experiment 2. We propose that, in the joint-action condition, self- and other-performed pointing movements are coded at the same representational level and their functional equivalency is reflected in a similar pattern of eye-fixations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document