Task Partners Research Articles

Investigation of the Joint Simon Effect with Human, Robot, and Computer Interface Task Partners: A Pilot Study

This pilot study assessed whether there are fundamental differences in how people perceive human and nonhuman task partners using a joint Simon task. Fourteen participants completed the task with human, robot, and computer task partners. Results showed no joint Simon effect for any task partner, and the robot and computer were both perceived as not very humanlike. However, while the robot was seen as less accurate and slower than the human task partner, the computer was consistently viewed as more accurate and faster. This indicates that there may be differences in user’s perceptions of different types of technological task partners, and that for certain tasks, robots may be seen as inferior while computers are viewed as superior.

The Effects of Expertise, Status Power, and Language Use on Perception of Task Partner

An experiment manipulated the relative expertise and status power of dyad task partners, examining how expertise and status power affect language use and if linguistic cues that emerged during the interaction influence a partner's assessment of the speaker's competence. One hundred twenty-eight dyads worked together on a problem-solving task without knowing who had received better quality information beforehand. One hundred twenty-four interactions were transcribed and quantified using both language software and human coders. Members with superior expertise spoke more words and used more tag questions than those with less expertise. The data did not yield support for more politeness in low-status members’ language nor more confidence in high-expertise members’ language. Members who spoke more were perceived as more competent by partners. Members who used more hedges were perceived as more competent and polite. Results identified language features that can be used strategically to exert influence on others and manage impressions.

Joint language production: An electrophysiological investigation of simulated lexical access on behalf of a task partner.

This study investigates in a joint action setting a well-established effect in speech production, cumulative semantic interference, an increase in naming latencies when naming a series of semantically related pictures. In a joint action setting, two task partners take turns naming pictures. Previous work in this setting has demonstrated that naming latencies increase not only with each semantically related picture speakers named themselves, but also with each picture named by the partner (Hoedemaker et al., 2017; Kuhlen & Abdel Rahman, 2017). This suggests that speakers pursue lexical access on behalf of their partner. In 2 electrophysiological experiments (N = 30 each) we investigated the neuro-cognitive signatures of such simulated lexical access. As expected, in both experiments speakers' naming latency increased with successive naming instances within a given semantic category. Correspondingly, speakers' electroencephalographic recordings (EEG) showed an increasing posterior positivity between 250-400 ms, an event-related potential (ERP) modulation typically associated with lexical access. However, unlike previous experiments, speakers were not influenced by their partner's picture naming. Accordingly, we found no electrophysiological evidence of lexical access. To reconcile these findings we pooled behavioral data from five experiments (N = 144). Within this large sample we find empirical evidence for partner-elicited interference. Furthermore, our data suggest that speakers may be less affected by their partner's naming response in settings with remotely located task partners (as in present experiments). We conclude that speakers do not always represent their partner's naming response and that our experimental setting may have limited the participants' evaluation of the task as a joint action. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Ad-hoc thematic relations form through communication: effects on lexical-semantic processing during language production

ABSTRACT In this preregistered study, we investigate whether themes conveyed by task partners’ narratives reveal semantic relationships between objects that would otherwise be perceived as unrelated. Such ad-hoc formation of thematic relations should result in semantic interference when naming objects related to the theme in a blocked-cyclic naming paradigm. Participants watch pre-recorded videos of presumed partners narrating real-life events, and then name pictures either thematically related or unrelated to the narrative. Experiments 1 and 2 (N = 32 each) demonstrate semantic interference between objects related to the partner's narrative. Interestingly, this effect emerges only when unrelated pictures are named first. Interference is greatly attenuated, or even turns into facilitation when related pictures are named directly after the partner's narrative. Experiment 3 (N = 32) confirms that semantic context effects disappear when the objects cannot be related to the narrative. Our results demonstrate how flexible semantic processing adapts to context communicated by a task partner.

Do We Take a Robot's Needs into Account? The Effect of Humanization on Prosocial Considerations Toward Other Human Beings and Robots.

Robots are becoming an integral part of society, yet the extent to which we are prosocial toward these nonliving objects is unclear. While previous research shows that we tend to take care of robots in high-risk, high-consequence situations, this has not been investigated in more day-to-day, low-consequence situations. Thus, we utilized an experimental paradigm (the Social Mindfulness "SoMi" paradigm) that involved a trade-off between participants' own interests and their willingness to take their task partner's needs into account. In two experiments, we investigated whether participants would take the needs of a robotic task partner into account to the same extent as when the task partner was a human (Study I), and whether this was modulated by participant's anthropomorphic attributions to said robot (Study II). In Study I, participants were presented with a social decision-making task, which they performed once by themselves (solo context) and once with a task partner (either a human or a robot). Subsequently, in Study II, participants performed the same task, but this time with both a human and a robotic task partner. The task partners were introduced via neutral or anthropomorphic priming stories. Results indicate that the effect of humanizing a task partner indeed increases our tendency to take someone else's needs into account in a social decision-making task. However, this effect was only found for a human task partner, not for a robot. Thus, while anthropomorphizing a robot may lead us to save it when it is about to perish, it does not make us more socially considerate of it in day-to-day situations.

Social interaction in the Spanish classroom: How proficiency and linguistic background impact vocabulary learning

Spanish learners engaged in two-way interaction gap tasks where, through social interaction, they identified and defined low-frequency vocabulary. Participants (referred to as actors to differentiate them from task partners) completed two such tasks. Each time, they collaborated with different partners of varying degrees of Spanish proficiency and linguistic background, either an L2 learner or a heritage speaker (HS). The purpose of the study was thus to shed light on if and how features of the collaborating partners in mixed (HS–L2) and matched (L2–L2; HS–HS) partnerships impacted vocabulary learning. Through a mixed methods analysis of the data (perception measures and qualitative responses, plus pre- and post-vocabulary tests), it was deduced that learners’ language proficiency level alone was not associated with differences in vocabulary gains. Rather, the nature of the partnerships among learners was more salient. In particular, learners in mixed partnerships had greater gains than those in matched partnerships. In addition, actors’ perceptions of the experience of working with their partner had no discernible effect on vocabulary, except for HSs who increased less when working with partners’ whose linguistic abilities they had rated as low. Pedagogical implications address learners’ social interaction in mixed language classrooms.

Reward interventions: A strategy to Erode social inequality?

Decades of research illuminates how status beliefs about socially significant characteristics, like gender, fundamentally alter expectations about individual's competence and worth. This process biases opportunity structures and resource distributions, thereby recreating social inequalities in a self-fulfilling fashion. Many social and organizational policies attempt to reduce inequality by increasing disadvantaged groups' access to valued rewards, such as prestigious alma maters, awards, and valued positions. In addition to meaningfully increasing resources, the status these rewards convey should also theoretically increase the status of the particular people who come to possess them. To know whether inversions to reward structures reduce social inequality, however, we must first demonstrate that the status value of rewards alone is an effective intervention. In an experimental test of interventions to gender status inequality, reward markers with relatively higher or lower status value were consistently or inconsistently associated with the gender of the participants' task partners. Results indicate that rewards intervened in the groups' gendered status hierarchy as participants were more likely to be influenced by their partners' rewards than their gender.

Rethinking reappraisal: The double-edged sword of regulating negative emotions in the workplace

Cognitive reappraisal can benefit employees, in terms of their emotional health. However, we propose that reappraisal can also entail hidden costs. Drawing on social-functionalist emotions theory, we posit that the use of reappraisal to control negative self-conscious emotions (guilt and shame) results in both positive employee outcomes (increased satisfaction, decreased burnout) and negative employee outcomes (increased counterproductive workplace behaviors (CWBs)). In Study 1, employees who used reappraisal to control guilt and shame were more satisfied and less burnt out, but also more likely to engage in CWBs. In Study 2, employees described what CWBs they would engage in if they faced no consequences: those using reappraisal to control guilt and shame reported more unethical CWBs and a greater willingness to actually perform the behavior. Study 3 assessed working MBA students in a live interaction (a heated negotiation), finding those who used reappraisal to control guilt and shame behaved more unethically. Studies 4 and 5 experimentally manipulated the use of reappraisal to control guilt and examined its effect on CWBs. Individuals in the reappraisal condition were more likely to withhold valuable resources from task partners (Study 4) and cheat on a work task (Study 5) than individuals in a control condition, providing causal evidence that reappraisal led to more CWBs.

Effects of a partner's task on memory for content and source

Human memories are malleable and often shaped by social interactions. Previous work has demonstrated that not only one's own goals, but also those of a task-partner can facilitate subsequent retrieval of goal-relevant lexical stimuli, known as the Joint Memory Effect (JME). We outline a social-epistemic account of the JME which proposes that this memory enhancement reflects humans' tendency to map out their interaction partners' knowledge states, leading them to cognitively prioritize information relevant to and selectively attended by their partner. This account predicts that the memory enhancement for partner-relevant words should be limited to contexts where task partners are required to process their targets in terms of meaning, instead of attending to a surface feature. Additionally, we predicted that facilitated recall performance for partner-relevant information would be accompanied by enhanced memory for the social context of that information, that is, participants should be able to link the remembered content to the agent acting on it. The results of four experiments support these predictions. We demonstrate that the JME emerges selectively, depending on which stimulus feature (word meaning or presentation color) is attended by the partner, and that it extends to (and may even depend on) memory for the social context of the targets. Prioritizing partner-relevant information in memory may be linked to processes involved in establishing and monitoring common ground.

Dyadic and triadic search: Benefits, costs, and predictors of group performance.

In daily life, humans often perform visual tasks, such as solving puzzles or searching for a friend in a crowd. Performing these visual searches jointly with a partner can be beneficial: The two task partners can devise effective division of labor strategies and thereby outperform individuals who search alone. To date, it is unknown whether these group benefits scale up to triads or whether the cost of coordinating with others offsets any potential benefit for group sizes above two. To address this question, we compare participants' performance in a visual search task that they perform either alone, in dyads, or in triads. When the search task is performed jointly, co-actors receive information about each other's gaze location. After controlling for speed-accuracy trade-offs, we found that triads searched faster than dyads, suggesting that group benefits do scale up to triads. Moreover, we found that the triads' divided the search space in accordance with the co-actors' individual search performances but searched less efficiently than dyads. We also present a linear model to predict group benefits, which accounts for 70% of the variance. The model includes our experimental factors and a set of non-redundant predictors, quantifying the similarities in the individual performances, the collaboration between co-actors, and the estimated benefits that co-actors would attain without collaborating. Overall, the present study demonstrates that group benefits scale up to larger group sizes, but the additional gains are attenuated by the increased costs associated with devising effective division of labor strategies.

Do Aligned Bodies Align Minds? The Partners’ Body Alignment as a Constraint on Spatial Perspective Use

ABSTRACTIn a direction-giving task, we examine whether a high-level constraint—the task partners’ relative body alignment—influences spatial language use and task accuracy. In 32 pairs, task partners interacted in two conditions: for one route description, direction givers (DGs) and direction followers (DFs) sat side-by-side (aligned condition), and for another they sat opposite one another (counter-aligned condition). After each description, DFs drew the route on a map. When pairs were counter-aligned (vs. aligned), DGs increased their use of expressions from a survey perspective, using more frequently terms such as east-west. When counter-aligned, DFs also used more words per conversational turn, which was taken to reflect the increased difficulty of coordinating in that condition. Still, in terms of task performance, the accuracy of DFs’ drawings was unaffected by the partners’ body alignment or spatial language use; it was only predicted by the DGs’ spatial ability. We argue that, because direction giving emphasizes accuracy, task partners invest in strategies that contribute to mutual understanding (e.g., recaps of the route by the DF at the end, evidenced by shifts in language use over time). Thus, body alignment in direction giving impacts coordination difficulty and spatial language use, but it does not singularly influence task performance.

Reciprocal information flow and role distribution support joint action coordination

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.

Interacting Timescales in Perspective-Taking.

Through theoretical discussion, literature review, and a computational model, this paper poses a challenge to the notion that perspective-taking involves a fixed architecture in which particular processes have priority. For example, some research suggests that egocentric perspectives can arise more quickly, with other perspectives (such as of task partners) emerging only secondarily. This theoretical dichotomy–between fast egocentric and slow other-centric processes–is challenged here. We propose a general view of perspective-taking as an emergent phenomenon governed by the interplay among cognitive mechanisms that accumulate information at different timescales. We first describe the pervasive relevance of perspective-taking to cognitive science. A dynamical systems model is then introduced that explicitly formulates the timescale interaction proposed. This model illustrates that, rather than having a rigid time course, perspective-taking can be fast or slow depending on factors such as task context. Implications are discussed, with ideas for future empirical research.

Perceptual judgments made better by indirect interactions: Evidence from a joint localization task.

Others’ perceptual judgments tend to have strong effects on our own, and can improve perceptual judgments when task partners engage in communication. The present study investigated whether individuals benefit from others’ perceptual judgments in indirect interactions, where outcomes of individual decisions can be observed in a shared environment. Participants located a target in a 2D projection of a 3D container either from two complementary viewpoints (Experiment 1), or from a single viewpoint (Experiment 2). Uncertainty about the target location was high on the front-back dimension and low on the left-right dimension. The results showed that pairs of participants benefitted from taking turns in providing judgments. When each member of the pair had access to one complementary perspective, the pair achieved the same level of accuracy as when the two individuals had access to both complimentary perspectives and better performance than when the two individuals had access to only one perspective. These findings demonstrate the important role of a shared environment for successful integration of perceptual information while highlighting limitations in assigning appropriate weights to others’ judgments.

Stimulating and sustaining interest in a language course: An experimental comparison of Chatbot and Human task partners

Novel technology can be a powerful tool for enhancing students' interest in many learning domains. However, the sustainability and overall impact of such interest is unclear. This study tests the longer-term effects of technology on students' task and course interest. The experimental study was conducted with students in foreign language classes (n = 122): a 12-week experimental trial that included pre- and post-course interest, and a sequence of task interest measures. Employing a counterbalanced design, at three week intervals students engaged in separate speaking tasks with each of a Human and “Chatbot” partner. Students' interest in successive tasks and in the course (pre-post), were used to assess differential partner effects and course interest development trajectories. Comparisons of task interest under different partner conditions over time indicated a significant drop in students' task interest with the Chatbot but not Human partner. After accounting for initial course interest, Structural Equation Modelling indicated that only task interest with the Human partner contributed to developing course interest. While Human partner task interest predicted future course interest, task interest under Chatbot partner conditions did not. Under Chatbot partner conditions there was a drop in task interest after the first task: a novelty effect. Implications for theory and practice are discussed.

Upsides and Downsides of Guilt

While guilt is a negative emotion, the growing literature on guilt proneness has illustrated that it can serve an adaptive function in interpersonal interactions. More specifically, guilt is associated with higher levels of empathy and perspective taking (e.g., Leith & Baumeister, 1998), which incites a strong sense of responsibility for one’s actions (Basil, Ridgeway, & Basil, 2006; Tangney et al, 2007). In the organizational behavior literature, guilt proneness has been identified as an individual characteristic that motivates individuals to take others’ perspectives and exert more effort on tasks – making guilt prone individuals superior task partners and leaders (Flynn & Schaumberg, 2012; Grant & Wrzesniewski, 2010; Schaumberg & Flynn, 2012). In this symposium, we include four empirical papers that seek to extend the existing work on guilt proneness in organizations. This symposium includes work that explores how guilt proneness: (1) can be detected, (2) can be beneficial in organizations by reducing absenteeism and affecting task performance, and (3) leads to non-rational behavior. In doing so, the symposium highlights several upsides and one downside of guilt. Detecting Guilt Proneness in Job Interviews Presenter: Yeonjeong Kim; Carnegie Mellon U. - Tepper School of Business Presenter: Taya R. Cohen; Carnegie Mellon U. Presenter: Abigail T Panter; U. of North Carolina The Role of Guilt Proneness in Failing Partnerships Presenter: Medha Raj; U. of Southern California Presenter: Scott Wiltermuth; U. of Southern California Presenter: Lori Qingyuan Yue; U. of Southern California The Moderating Role of Guilt Proneness in the Relationship between Job Satisfaction and Absenteeism Presenter: Rebecca L. Schaumberg; New York U. Presenter: Frank Flynn; Stanford U. Guilt is Good: The Relationship between Guilt Proneness and Task Performance Presenter: Rebecca L. Schaumberg; New York U. Presenter: Koji Chavez; Stanford U. Presenter: Anna Merritt; Yahoo, Inc. Presenter: Frank Flynn; Stanford U.

Liking the Same Things, but Doing Things Differently: Outcome Versus Strategic Compatibility in Partner Preferences for Joint Tasks

We propose a distinction between two types of interpersonal compatibility in determining partner preferences for joint tasks: outcome compatibility and strategic compatibility. We argue that these two types of compatibility correspond to preferences for similar and complementary task partners, respectively. Five studies support this distinction. A pilot study demonstrates that established scales for measuring attitudes and values (variables associated with similarity effects) capture more information about desired outcomes, whereas established scales for measuring dominance (the variable most widely associated with complementarity effects) capture more information about desired strategies. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrate that framing the same variable as either an outcome variable or a strategic variable can predict partner preference (i.e., similar or complementary). Finally, Studies 2a and 2b address why complementarity may offer a strategic advantage over similarity in task pursuit: complementarity allows two individuals with contrasting strategic preferences to “divide and conquer” tasks that require multiple strategies.

Integrity and Identity: Moral Identity Differences and Preferred Interpersonal Reactions

Moral identity affects interpersonal relationships by guiding how people perceive and respond to feedback, evaluate others and select task partners and friends. Self–described principled participants (high scorers on the Integrity Scale) more strongly preferred principled–prototypic others over expedient ones and believed it possible to be more principled in one's beliefs (Study 1), preferred evaluators who regarded them as principled over expedient (Study 2), had friends who saw them as principled and paired up with friends who were themselves principled (Study 3). In contrast, expedient individuals did not display mirror–image reactions but saw merit in being both expedient and principled; they were accepting of any relevant feedback and partner preferences. Moral identity is a key link between ethical beliefs and behaviours. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

When Competence Is Irrelevant: The Role of Interpersonal Affect in Task-Related Ties

This paper examines the role of a person's generalized positive or negative feelings toward someone (interpersonal affect) in task-related networks in organizations. We theorize that negative interpersonal affect renders task competence virtually irrelevant in a person's choice of a partner for task interactions but that positive interpersonal affect increases a person's reliance on competence as a criterion for choosing task partners, facilitating access to organizational resources relevant to the task. Using social psychological models of interpersonal perception and hierarchical Bayesian models, we find support for this theory in social network data from employees in three organizations: an entrepreneurial computer technology company, staff personnel at an academic institution, and employees in a large information technology corporation. The results suggest that competence may be irrelevant not just when outright dislike colors a relationship. Across organizational contexts and types of task-related interaction, people appear to need active liking to seek out the task resources of potential work partners and fully tap into the knowledge that resides in organizations. We discuss contributions of our study to research on the interplay of psychological and structural dimensions of organizational life.

An unconscious desire for hierarchy? The motivated perception of dominance complementarity in task partners.

In 6 studies, the authors examined the perception of dominance complementarity, which is the perception of a target as different from the self in terms of dominance. The authors argue that these perceptions are motivated by the desire for positive task relationships. Because dominance complementarity bodes well for task-oriented relationships, seeing dominance complementarity allows one to be optimistic about a work relationship. As evidence that perceptions of dominance complementarity are an instance of motivated perception, the authors show that complementary perceptions occur when participants think about or expect task-oriented relationships with the target and that perceptions of dominance complementarity are enhanced when individuals care about the task component of the relationship.