Abstract

Many joint actions require task partners to temporally coordinate actions that follow different spatial patterns. This creates the need to find trade-offs between temporal coordination and spatial alignment. To study coordination under incongruent spatial and temporal demands, we devised a novel coordination task that required task partners to synchronize their actions while tracing different shapes that implied conflicting velocity profiles. In three experiments, we investigated whether coordination under incongruent demands is best achieved through mutually coupled predictions or through a clear role distribution with only one task partner adjusting to the other. Participants solved the task of trading off spatial and temporal coordination demands equally well when mutually perceiving each other’s actions without any role distribution, and when acting in a leader-follower configuration where the leader was unable to see the follower’s actions. Coordination was significantly worse when task partners who had been assigned roles could see each other’s actions. These findings make three contributions to our understanding of coordination mechanisms in joint action. First, they show that mutual prediction facilitates coordination under incongruent demands, demonstrating the importance of coupled predictive models in a wide range of coordination contexts. Second, they show that mutual alignment of velocity profiles in the absence of a leader-follower dynamic is more wide-spread than previously thought. Finally, they show that role distribution can result in equally effective coordination as mutual prediction without role assignment, provided that the role distribution is not arbitrarily imposed but determined by (lack of) perceptual access to a partner’s actions.

Highlights

  • Being able to coordinate our actions with others is one of the most remarkable human social abilities

  • Asynchrony Pairs were better synchronized in congruent compared to incongruent trials, as shown by the significant main effect of Coordination Demand (F(1,9) = 84.56, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.90)

  • The analysis showed a significant interaction of Direction Change and Coordination Demand (F(1,18) = 23.53, p < 0.001, η2 = 0.56), indicating that both participants slowed down in straight-line segments in incongruent trials compared to congruent trials, to the point that the average velocity of straight-line and corner segments in incongruent trials was not significantly different (p = 0.99)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Being able to coordinate our actions with others is one of the most remarkable human social abilities. Is it important that both task partners adjust to each other, or can a clear distribution of leader and follower roles lead to similar or even better coordination?. Previous research indicates that interaction partners’ ability to mutually adapt to each other and to engage in predictions about each other’s actions plays an important role in achieving joint action coordination (e.g., Knoblich & Jordan, 2003; Keller, Knoblich, & Repp, 2007; Kourtis, Sebanz, & Knoblich, 2013; Vuust & Witek, 2014; see Keller, Novembre, & Hove, 2014 for a review). Synchronization performance was better when both participants received information about each other’s actions than when the unidirectional flow of information turned one of them into a leader and the other into a follower

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call