The joint flanker effect: sharing tasks with real and imagined co-actors

The Eriksen flanker task (Eriksen and Eriksen in Percept Psychophys 16:143–149, 1974) was distributed among pairs of participants to investigate whether individuals take into account a co-actor’s S–R mapping even when coordination is not required. Participants responded to target letters (Experiment 1) or colors (Experiment 2) surrounded by distractors. When performing their part of the task next to another person performing the complementary part of the task, participants responded more slowly to stimuli containing flankers that were potential targets for their co-actor (incompatible trials), compared to stimuli containing identical, compatible, or neutral flankers. This joint Flanker effect also occurred when participants merely believed to be performing the task with a co-actor (Experiment 3). Furthermore, Experiment 4 demonstrated that people form shared task representations only when they perceive their co-actor as intentionally controlling her actions. These findings substantiate and generalize earlier results on shared task representations and advance our understanding of the basic mechanisms subserving joint action.

[1]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[2]  S. Kornblum,et al.  Stimulus-response compatibility with relevant and irrelevant stimulus dimensions that do and do not overlap with the response. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[3]  H. Bekkering,et al.  The mirror neuron system is more active during complementary compared with imitative action , 2007, Nature Neuroscience.

[4]  R. Schmidt,et al.  A comparison of intra- and interpersonal interlimb coordination: coordination breakdowns and coupling strength. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[5]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance , 2004 .

[6]  John D. E. Gabrieli,et al.  Material-dependent and material-independent selection processes in the frontal and parietal lobes: an event-related fMRI investigation of response competition , 2003, Neuropsychologia.

[7]  G Aschersleben,et al.  Correspondence effects with manual gestures and postures: a study of imitation. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  Asher Cohen,et al.  Perceptual Dimensional Constraints in Response Selection Processes , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[9]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Please Scroll down for Article Social Neuroscience Action Co-representation: the Joint Snarc Effect Action Co-representation: the Joint Snarc Effect , 2022 .

[10]  Wen-Jui Kuo,et al.  Action Co-representation is Tuned to Other Humans , 2008, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[11]  Timothy N Welsh,et al.  When 1+1=1: the unification of independent actors revealed through joint Simon effects in crossed and uncrossed effector conditions. , 2009, Human movement science.

[12]  A F Sanders,et al.  The Eriksen flanker effect revisited. , 2002, Acta psychologica.

[13]  Savas L. Tsohatzidis,et al.  Intentional acts and institutional facts : essays on John Searle's social ontology , 2010 .

[14]  Henk Aarts,et al.  When competition merges people's behavior: Interdependency activates shared action representations , 2010 .

[15]  C. Eriksen,et al.  Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task , 1974 .

[16]  C W Eriksen,et al.  Information processing in visual search: A continuous flow conception and experimental results , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[17]  N. Sebanz,et al.  Jumping on the ecological bandwagon? Mind the gap! , 2009 .

[18]  Matthew R Longo,et al.  Automatic imitation of biomechanically possible and impossible actions: effects of priming movements versus goals. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[19]  W. Prinz,et al.  Movement observation affects movement execution in a simple response task. , 2001, Acta psychologica.

[20]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  The Virtual Co-Actor: The Social Simon Effect does not Rely on Online Feedback from the Other , 2010, Front. Psychology.

[21]  W. Prinz Perception and Action Planning , 1997 .

[22]  G. Rizzolatti,et al.  The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: interpretations and misinterpretations , 2010, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[23]  J. R. Aiello,et al.  Social facilitation from Triplett to electronic performance monitoring. , 2001 .

[24]  M. Botvinick,et al.  Conflict monitoring and cognitive control. , 2001, Psychological review.

[25]  S. Dehaene,et al.  The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. , 1993 .

[26]  D. Madden,et al.  Age-related changes in selective attention and perceptual load during visual search. , 2003, Psychology and aging.

[27]  Jessica A. Sommerville,et al.  Pulling out the intentional structure of action: the relation between action processing and action production in infancy , 2005, Cognition.

[28]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Social Connection Through Joint Action and Interpersonal Coordination , 2009, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[29]  H. Bekkering,et al.  Modulation of activity in medial frontal and motor cortices during error observation , 2004, Nature Neuroscience.

[30]  G. Knoblich,et al.  Action coordination in groups and individuals: learning anticipatory control. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[31]  Elena Rusconi,et al.  Sharing a task or sharing space? On the effect of the confederate in action coding in a detection task , 2010, Cognition.

[32]  Sandro Rubichi,et al.  Shared learning shapes human performance: Transfer effects in task sharing , 2010, Cognition.

[33]  A. Osman,et al.  Dimensional overlap: cognitive basis for stimulus-response compatibility--a model and taxonomy. , 1990, Psychological review.

[34]  Y. Paulignan,et al.  An Interference Effect of Observed Biological Movement on Action , 2003, Current Biology.

[35]  X. Gu,et al.  Neural consequences of religious belief on self-referential processing , 2008, Social neuroscience.

[36]  Romeo Chua,et al.  Within- and between-nervous-system inhibition of return: Observation is as good as performance , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[37]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Effects of visual and verbal interaction on unintentional interpersonal coordination. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[38]  B. Kopp,et al.  N200 in the flanker task as a neurobehavioral tool for investigating executive control. , 1996, Psychophysiology.

[39]  Jason P. Mitchell,et al.  Dissociable Medial Prefrontal Contributions to Judgments of Similar and Dissimilar Others , 2006, Neuron.

[40]  Jeff F. Miller The flanker compatibility effect as a function of visual angle, attentional focus, visual transients, and perceptual load: A search for boundary conditions , 1991, Perception & psychophysics.

[41]  N. Sebanz,et al.  Contextual determinants of the social-transfer-of-learning effect , 2011, Experimental Brain Research.

[42]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Twin Peaks: An ERP Study of Action Planning and Control in Coacting Individuals , 2006, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[43]  G. Grice,et al.  Temporal characteristics of noise conditions producing facilitation and interference , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[44]  Harold Bekkering,et al.  Fast responders have blinders on: ERP correlates of response inhibition in competition , 2008, Cortex.

[45]  A. Daffertshofer,et al.  Characteristics of instructed and uninstructed interpersonal coordination while walking side-by-side , 2008, Neuroscience Letters.

[46]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. , 2007, Human movement science.

[47]  J. H. Flowers,et al.  Priming effects in perceptual classification , 1990, Perception & psychophysics.

[48]  Erwin Hennighausen,et al.  N200 in the Eriksen-Task: Inhibitory Executive Processes? , 2000 .

[49]  W. Prinz,et al.  How two share a task: corepresenting stimulus-response mappings. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[50]  Andreas Roepstorff,et al.  What’s at the top in the top-down control of action? Script-sharing and ‘top-top’ control of action in cognitive experiments , 2004, Psychological research.

[51]  Andrea M Philipp,et al.  Evidence for a Role of the Responding Agent in the Joint Compatibility Effect , 2010, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[52]  R. Poldrack,et al.  Neural Activation During Response Competition , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[53]  J. R. Simon The Effects of an Irrelevant Directional CUE on Human Information Processing , 1990 .

[54]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Altruistic Helping in Human Infants and Young Chimpanzees , 2006, Science.

[55]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Anterior Cingulate Cortex, Conflict Monitoring, and Levels of Processing , 2001, NeuroImage.

[56]  Michael T. Turvey,et al.  Frequency detuning of the phase entrainment dynamics of visually coupled rhythmic movements , 1995, Biological Cybernetics.

[57]  R W Proctor,et al.  Repeated-stimulus superiority and inferiority effects in the identification of letters and digits , 1985, Perception & psychophysics.

[58]  Charles W. Eriksen,et al.  Target redundancy in visual search: Do repetitions of the target within thedisplay impair processing? , 1979 .

[59]  W. Prinz,et al.  Representing others' actions: just like one's own? , 2003, Cognition.

[60]  Wolfgang Prinz,et al.  Is it really my turn? An event-related fMRI study of task sharing , 2007, Social neuroscience.

[61]  M. Brass,et al.  The inhibition of imitative and overlearned responses: a functional double dissociation , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

[62]  Seumas Miller Joint Action: The Individual Strikes Back , 2007 .

[63]  R. Zajonc SOCIAL FACILITATION. , 1965, Science.

[64]  G. Aschersleben,et al.  Correspondence effects with manual gestures and postures: a study of imitation. , 2000 .

[65]  W. Prinz,et al.  Compatibility between Observed and Executed Finger Movements: Comparing Symbolic, Spatial, and Imitative Cues , 2000, Brain and Cognition.