Abstract

Automatic imitation tasks measuring motor priming effects showed that we directly map observed actions of other agents onto our own motor repertoire (direct matching). A recent joint action study using a social dual-task paradigm provided evidence for task monitoring. In the present study, we aimed to test (a) if automatic imitation is disturbed during joint action and (b) if task monitoring is content or time dependent. We used a social dual-task that was made of an automatic imitation task (Person 1: Task 1) and a two-choice number task (Person 2: Task 2). Each participant performed one of the two tasks, which were given with a variable stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA), in an individual and a joint condition. We found a regular motor priming effect in individual and joint conditions. Under joint conditions, we replicated the previous finding of an increase of reaction times for Person 2 with decreasing SOA. The latter effect was not related to the specific responses performed by both persons. Further, we did not find evidence for a representation of the other's specific S-R mappings. Our findings suggest that (a) automatic imitation is not disturbed during joint action and (b) task monitoring is time dependent.

Highlights

  • When somebody performs two tasks at the same time performance either in one (Pashler and Johnston, 1989) or both of the tasks (Tombu and Jolicoeur, 2004) is reduced, because the cognitive system has only a limited amount of capacity for information processing

  • More recent approaches discuss the role of crosstalk between the two responses, linking the psychological refractory period (PRP) to spatially mediated responseresponse (R-R) compatibility effects (e.g., Hommel, 1998; Lien and Proctor, 2000; Schubert et al, 2008; Liepelt et al, 2011a)

  • As a dependent measure Reaction times (RTs) were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) with different factors specified below

Read more

Summary

Introduction

When somebody performs two tasks at the same time performance either in one (Pashler and Johnston, 1989) or both of the tasks (Tombu and Jolicoeur, 2004) is reduced, because the cognitive system has only a limited amount of capacity for information processing. More recent approaches discuss the role of crosstalk between the two responses, linking the PRP to spatially mediated responseresponse (R-R) compatibility effects (e.g., Hommel, 1998; Lien and Proctor, 2000; Schubert et al, 2008; Liepelt et al, 2011a). This response-response crosstalk helps to reduce dual-task costs under compatible R-R conditions (e.g., left-left), but hinders dual-task cost reduction under incompatible conditions (e.g., left-right)

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