Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
Recent studies suggest that co-acting with another person induces a problem to discriminate between one’s own and the other’s actions which can be resolved by emphasizing action features that discriminate best between both persons’ actions in a given task context. Mostly, overt action features like the spatial position of responses have been suggested as discriminating action features. In the present study, we tested whether non-externally perceivable, covert action features can be used for resolving the action discrimination problem during joint action. Therefore, we compared task performance between a joint and an individual version of the Go/Nogo Association Task, a task requiring the association of a valence to the response. We found a larger implicit attitude effect in the joint than in the individual setting for person-related (self and other, Experiment 1) as well as for non-person-related attitude objects (fruit and insect, Experiment 2) suggesting that the weight of valence information is increased in the internal coding of responses when valence discriminates between both responses. In contrast, we found a smaller implicit attitude effect in a person present setting than an individual setting (Experiment 3) indicating that the enhanced implicit attitude effect observed in the joint settings of Experiments 1 and 2 is not due to social facilitation. Our results suggest that action discrimination during joint action can rely on covert action features. The results are in line with the referential coding account, and specify the kind of action features that are represented when sharing a task with another person.
Log in om toegang te krijgen
Met onderstaand(e) abonnement(en) heeft u direct toegang:
Aiello, J. R., & Douthitt, E. A. (2001). Social facilitation theory from Triplett to electronic performance monitoring. Group Dynamics, 5, 163–180. CrossRef
Blair, I. V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 242–261. CrossRef
Bluemke, M., & Friese, M. (2011). On the validity of idiographic and generic self-concept implicit association tests: a core-concept model. European Journal of Personality, 26, 515–528. CrossRef
De Houwer, J. (2001). A structural and process analysis of the implicit association test. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 443–451. CrossRef
De Houwer, J. (2003). A structural analysis of indirect measures of attitudes. In J. Musch & K. C. Klauer (Eds.), The psychology of evaluation: Affective processes in cognition and emotion (pp. 219–244). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dittrich, K., Rothe, A., & Klauer, K. C. (2012) Increased spatial salience in the social Simon task: a response-coding account of spatial compatibility effects. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 74, 911–929. CrossRef
Dittrich, K., Dolk, T., Rothe-Wulf, A., Klauer, K. C., & Prinz, W. (2013). Keys and seats: spatial response coding underlying the joint spatial compatibility effect. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 75, 1725–1736. CrossRef
Dolk, T., Hommel, B., Prinz, W., & Liepelt, R. (2013). The (not so) Social Simon effect: A referential coding account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
Eder, A. B., Rothermund, K., De Houwer, J., & Hommel, B. (2014). Directive and incentive functions of affective action consequences: an ideomotor approach. Psychological Research, 1–20.
Fazio, R. H. (1990). Multiple processes by which attitudes guide behavior: The MODE model as an integrative framework. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 23, pp. 75–109). New York: Academic Press.
Guerin, B. (1986). Mere presence effects in humans: a review. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 38–77. CrossRef
Kleiner, M., Brainard, D., & Pelli, D. (2007). What’s new in Psychtoolbox-3? Perception, 36, ECVP Abstract Supplement.
Mitchell, J. P., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Contextual variations in implicit evaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132, 455–469. CrossRef
Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The go/no-go association task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666. CrossRef
Olson, M. A., & Fazio, R. H. (2009). Implicit and explicit measures of attitudes: the perspective of the MODE model. In R. E. Petty, R. H. Fazio, & P. Briñol (Eds.), Attitudes: Insights from the new implicit measures (pp. 19–63). New York: Psychology Press.
Rothermund, K., & Wentura, D. (2004). Underlying processes in the implicit association test: dissociating salience from associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 139–165. CrossRef
Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W. (2005). How two share a task: co-representing stimulus–response mappings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1234–1246.
Sellaro, R., Dolk, T., Colzato, L., Liepelt, R., & Hommel, B. (2015). Referential coding does not rely on location features: evidence for a non-spatial joint Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 41, 186–195. PubMed
Wenke, D., Atmaca, S., Holländer, A., Liepelt, R., Baess, P., & Prinz, W. (2011). What is shared in joint action? Issues of co-representation, response conflict, and agent identification. The Review of Philosophy and Psychology, 2, 147–172. CrossRef
- Joint action changes valence-based action coding in an implicit attitude task
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg