Automatic Imitation of Biomechanically Possible and Impossible Actions: Effects of Priming Movements versus Goals
Saved in:
| Title: | Automatic Imitation of Biomechanically Possible and Impossible Actions: Effects of Priming Movements versus Goals |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Longo, Matthew R., Kosobud, Adam, Bertenthal, Bennett I. |
| Source: | Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. Apr 2008 34(2):489-501. |
| Availability: | American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Physical Description: | |
| Page Count: | 13 |
| Publication Date: | 2008 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: | Imitation, Motor Reactions, Objectives, Observation, Influences, Attention, Experiments |
| DOI: | 10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.489 |
| ISSN: | 0096-1523 |
| Abstract: | Recent behavioral, neuroimaging, and neurophysiological research suggests a common representational code mediating the observation and execution of actions; yet, the nature of this representational code is not well understood. The authors address this question by investigating (a) whether this observation-execution matching system (or mirror system) codes both the constituent movements of an action as well as its goal and (b) how such sensitivity is influenced by top-down effects of instructions. The authors tested the automatic imitation of observed finger actions while manipulating whether the movements were biomechanically possible or impossible, but holding the goal constant. When no mention was made of this difference (Experiment 1), comparable automatic imitation was elicited from possible and impossible actions, suggesting that the actions had been coded at the level of the goal. When attention was drawn to this difference (Experiment 2), however, only possible movements elicited automatic imitation. This sensitivity was specific to imitation, not affecting spatial stimulus-response compatibility (Experiment 3). These results suggest that automatic imitation is modulated by top-down influences, coding actions in terms of both movements and goals depending on the focus of attention. (Contains 5 figures and 4 footnotes.) |
| Abstractor: | Author |
| Number of References: | 78 |
| Entry Date: | 2008 |
| Accession Number: | EJ791039 |
| Database: | ERIC |
| FullText | Text: Availability: 0 |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ791039 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Automatic Imitation of Biomechanically Possible and Impossible Actions: Effects of Priming Movements versus Goals – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Longo%2C+Matthew+R%2E%22">Longo, Matthew R.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kosobud%2C+Adam%22">Kosobud, Adam</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Bertenthal%2C+Bennett+I%2E%22">Bertenthal, Bennett I.</searchLink> – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Experimental+Psychology%3A+Human+Perception+and+Performance%22"><i>Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance</i></searchLink>. Apr 2008 34(2):489-501. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: American Psychological Association. Journals Department, 750 First Street NE, Washington, DC 20002-4242. Tel: 800-374-2721; Tel: 202-336-5510; Fax: 202-336-5502; e-mail: order@apa.org; Web site: http://www.apa.org/publications – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: PhysDesc Label: Physical Description Group: PhysDesc Data: PDF – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 13 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2008 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Imitation%22">Imitation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Motor+Reactions%22">Motor Reactions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Objectives%22">Objectives</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Observation%22">Observation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Influences%22">Influences</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attention%22">Attention</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experiments%22">Experiments</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.489 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 0096-1523 – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Recent behavioral, neuroimaging, and neurophysiological research suggests a common representational code mediating the observation and execution of actions; yet, the nature of this representational code is not well understood. The authors address this question by investigating (a) whether this observation-execution matching system (or mirror system) codes both the constituent movements of an action as well as its goal and (b) how such sensitivity is influenced by top-down effects of instructions. The authors tested the automatic imitation of observed finger actions while manipulating whether the movements were biomechanically possible or impossible, but holding the goal constant. When no mention was made of this difference (Experiment 1), comparable automatic imitation was elicited from possible and impossible actions, suggesting that the actions had been coded at the level of the goal. When attention was drawn to this difference (Experiment 2), however, only possible movements elicited automatic imitation. This sensitivity was specific to imitation, not affecting spatial stimulus-response compatibility (Experiment 3). These results suggest that automatic imitation is modulated by top-down influences, coding actions in terms of both movements and goals depending on the focus of attention. (Contains 5 figures and 4 footnotes.) – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: Author – Name: Ref Label: Number of References Group: RefInfo Data: 78 – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2008 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ791039 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ791039 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1037/0096-1523.34.2.489 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 13 StartPage: 489 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Imitation Type: general – SubjectFull: Motor Reactions Type: general – SubjectFull: Objectives Type: general – SubjectFull: Observation Type: general – SubjectFull: Influences Type: general – SubjectFull: Attention Type: general – SubjectFull: Experiments Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Automatic Imitation of Biomechanically Possible and Impossible Actions: Effects of Priming Movements versus Goals Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Longo, Matthew R. – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Kosobud, Adam – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Bertenthal, Bennett I. IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 04 Type: published Y: 2008 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 0096-1523 Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 34 – Type: issue Value: 2 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
