Is Automatic Imitation Based on Goal Coding or Movement Coding?
A Comparison of Goal-Directed and Goal-Less Actions
Abstract
A key issue for research on automatic imitation is whether it occurs primarily at the level of movements, that is, by automatically activating a representation of the movement/effector involved in the execution of the observed action, or at the level of goals, that is, by triggering a representation of the action goal, irrespective of how the motor act is physically instantiated. The present study presents two experiments aimed at investigating the contribution of movement coding and goal coding to automatic imitation, by assessing participants’ performance in a spatial compatibility task where the observed stimuli were goal-directed and goal-less actions, which have been demonstrated to elicit, respectively, goal and movement coding. We found a significant automatic imitation effect both when the stimuli were goal-less actions and when they were actions directed toward a goal. However, the effect was stronger for the goal-less actions, even after controlling for saliency effects. These results suggest that goal coding contributes to automatic imitation, but to a lesser degree compared to movement coding. The implications of these results for theory and research on automatic imitation are discussed.
References
(2000). Imitation of gestures in children is goal-directed. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53, 153–164.
(2006). Imitative response tendencies following observation of no-goal directed actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 210–225.
(2007). General processes, rather than “goals,” explain imitation errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33, 1158–1169.
(2011). Goal-directed actions are more contagious than non-goal-directed actions. Experimental Psychology, 58, 71–78.
(2000). Compatibility between observed and executed finger movements: Comparing symbolic, spatial and imitative cues. Brain and Cognition, 44, 124–143.
(2011). Time course analyses confirm independence of automatic imitation and spatial compatibility effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 409–421.
(2009). Representation of goal and movements without overt motor behavior in the human motor cortex: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 11134–11138.
(2010). Representation of goal state-dependent TMS reveals a hierarchical representation of observed acts in the temporal, parietal, and premotor cortices. Cerebral Cortex, 20, 2252–2258.
(2007). Exploring the functional and anatomical bases of mirror-image and anatomical imitation: The role of the frontal lobes. Neuropsychologia, 47, 784–795.
(2008). The effect of action goal hierarchy on the coding of object orientation in imitation tasks: Evidence from patients with parietal lobe damage. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 25, 1011–1026.
(2008). fMRI adaptation reveals mirror neurons in human inferior parietal cortex. Current Biology, 18, 1576–1580.
(1995). Strategical determinants of compatibility effects with task uncertainty. Acta Psychologica, 88, 187–207.
(2009). From monkey mirror neurons to primate behaviours: Possible “direct” and “indirect” pathways. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences, 364, 2311–2323.
(2000). Children’s coding of human action: Cognitive factors influencing imitation in 3-year-olds. Developmental Science, 3, 405–414.
(2011). The role of emotional context in facilitating imitative actions. Acta Psychologica, 138, 311–315.
(1990). Spatial coding and spatio-anatomical mapping: Evidence for a hierarchical model of spatial stimulus-response compatibility. In , Stimulus-response compatibility: An integrated perspective (pp. 117–143). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: North-Holland.
(2011). Automatic imitation. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 463–483.
, (1997). Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
(2005). Neural mechanisms of imitation. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 15, 632–637.
(2007). Methodological problems undermine tests of the ideo-motor conjecture. Experimental Brain Research, 182, 549–558.
(2009). Evidence of mirror neurons in human inferior frontal gyrus. The Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 10153–10159.
(2010). Hand to mouth: Automatic imitation across effector systems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1174–1183.
(2010). When do we simulate non-human agents? Dissociating communicative and non-communicative actions. Cognition, 115, 426–434.
(2008). What is matched in direct matching? Intention attribution modulates motor priming. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 578–591.
(2008). Automatic imitation of biomechanically possible and impossible actions: Effects of priming movements versus goals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 489–501.
(2010). Single-neuron responses in humans during execution and observation of actions. Current Biology, 20, 750–756.
(2008). Automatic imitation of intransitive actions. Brain and Cognition, 67, 44–50.
(2006). Stimulus-response compatibility principles: Data, theory, and application. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
(1986). What is crossed in crossed-hand effects? Acta Psychologica, 62, 89–100.
(2006). Spatial coding in two dimensions. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 201–216.
(2008). Conceptual knowledge for understanding other’s actions is organized primarily around action goals. Experimental Brain Research, 189, 99–107.
(2004). Mixing compatible and incompatible mappings: Elimination, reduction, and enhancement of spatial compatibility effects. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 57, 539–556.
(2010). The influence of goals on movement kinematics during imitation. Experimental Brain Research, 204, 353–360.
(2002). Is human imitation based on a mirror-neuron system? Experimental Brain Research, 143, 335–341.
(2003). Action generation and action perception in imitation: An instance of the ideomotor principle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Series B, Biological Sciences, 358, 501–515.
