Collective synchrony increases prosociality towards non‐performers and outgroup members

Abstract

Previous research has found that behavioural synchrony between people leads to greater prosocial tendencies towards co-performers. In this study, we investigated the scope of this prosocial effect: does it extend beyond the performance group to an extended ingroup (extended parochial prosociality) or even to other people in general (generalized prosociality)? Participants performed a simple rhythmic movement either in time (synchrony condition) or out of time (asynchrony condition) with each other. Before and during the rhythmic movement, participants were exposed to a prime that made salient an extended ingroup identity. After the task, half of the participants had the opportunity to help an extended ingroup member; the other half had the opportunity to help an outgroup member. We found a main effect of our synchrony manipulation across both help targets suggesting that the prosocial effects of synchrony extend to non-performers. Furthermore, there was a significantly higher proportion of participants willing to help an outgroup member after moving collectively in synchrony. This study shows that under certain intergroup contexts synchrony can lead to generalized prosociality with performers displaying greater prosociality even towards outgroup members.

Editorial: The Evolution of Rhythm Cognition: Timing in Music and Speech

“…The relationship between rhythm and sociality has seen a steady increase in research and has probably been the most investigated topic over the last 2 years (Large and Gray, 2015; Yu and Tomonaga, 2015; Ellamil et al, 2016; Gebauer et al, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2016; Moore et al, 2016; Reddish et al, 2016; Rennung and Göritz, 2016; Schirmer et al, 2016; Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016; Wallot et al, 2016; Bishop and Goebl, 2017; Chang et al, 2017; Cirelli et al, 2017; Hannon et al, 2017; Knight et al, 2017; Mogan et al, 2017; Murphy and Schul, 2017; Rorato et al, 2017; Myers et al). Common foci are the relationship between synchronization and prosociality (Gebauer et al, 2016; Reddish et al, 2016; Rennung and Göritz, 2016; Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016; Cirelli et al, 2017), and different forms of rhythmic behaviors in interaction (Large and Gray, 2015; Ravignani, 2015; Yu and Tomonaga, 2015; Ellamil et al, 2016; Gebauer et al, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2016; Moore et al, 2016; Schirmer et al, 2016; Wallot et al, 2016; Murphy and Schul, 2017).…”

“…Common foci are the relationship between synchronization and prosociality (Gebauer et al, 2016; Reddish et al, 2016; Rennung and Göritz, 2016; Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016; Cirelli et al, 2017), and different forms of rhythmic behaviors in interaction (Large and Gray, 2015; Ravignani, 2015; Yu and Tomonaga, 2015; Ellamil et al, 2016; Gebauer et al, 2016; Greenfield et al, 2016; Moore et al, 2016; Schirmer et al, 2016; Wallot et al, 2016; Murphy and Schul, 2017). …”

The Evolution of Rhythm Cognition: Timing in Music and Speech

“…The relationship between rhythm and sociality has seen a steady increase in research and has probably been the most investigated topic over the last 2 years (Large and Gray, 2015;Yu and Tomonaga, 2015;Ellamil et al, 2016;Gebauer et al, 2016;Greenfield et al, 2016;Moore et al, 2016;Reddish et al, 2016;Rennung and Göritz, 2016;Schirmer et al, 2016;Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016;Wallot et al, 2016;Bishop and Goebl, 2017;Chang et al, 2017;Cirelli et al, 2017;Hannon et al, 2017;Knight et al, 2017;Mogan et al, 2017;Murphy and Schul, 2017;Rorato et al, 2017;Myers et al). Common foci are the relationship between synchronization and prosociality (Gebauer et al, 2016;Reddish et al, 2016;Rennung and Göritz, 2016;Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016;Cirelli et al, 2017), and different forms of rhythmic behaviors in interaction (Large and Gray, 2015;Ravignani, 2015;Yu and Tomonaga, 2015;Ellamil et al, 2016;Gebauer et al, 2016;Greenfield et al, 2016;Moore et al, 2016;Schirmer et al, 2016;Wallot et al, 2016;Murphy and Schul, 2017).…”

“…Common foci are the relationship between synchronization and prosociality (Gebauer et al, 2016;Reddish et al, 2016;Rennung and Göritz, 2016;Tunçgenç and Cohen, 2016;Cirelli et al, 2017), and different forms of rhythmic behaviors in interaction (Large and Gray, 2015;Ravignani, 2015;Yu and Tomonaga, 2015;Ellamil et al, 2016;Gebauer et al, 2016;Greenfield et al, 2016;Moore et al, 2016;Schirmer et al, 2016;Wallot et al, 2016;Murphy and Schul, 2017).…”

Improving Social Interactive Learning through Dual Brain Stimulation

“…It was inspired by a growing body of research indicating that interpersonal synchronous movement can augment pro-social behaviors (18)(19)(20)(21)(22)(23), hypothetically even social learning.…”