Exploring visuomotor priming following biological and non-biological stimuli

Gowen, Emma; Bradshaw, C. M.; Galpin, Adam; Lawrence, Adam B.; Poliakoff, Ellen

doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2010.08.010

Cited by 28 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 42 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For instance, Heyes and colleagues (Catmur et al, 2007;Heyes et al, 2005) showed that the automatic effects of imitation can be abolished following incompatible training. In the same vein, Gowen and colleagues (Gowen, Bradshaw, Galpin, Lawrence, & Poliakoff, 2010) have recently demonstrated that automatic imitation is not as "automatic" as previously thought, but can be influenced by context. In order for visuomotor priming to occur, attention must be directed specifically to the action being performed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

From simulation to reciprocity: The case of complementary actions

Sartori

Cavallo

Bucchioni

et al. 2012

Social Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A large body of research reports that perceiving body movements of other people activates motor representations in the observer's brain. This automatic resonance mechanism appears to be imitative in nature. However, action observation does not inevitably lead to symmetrical motor facilitation: Mirroring the observed movement might be disadvantageous for successfully performing joint actions. What remains unknown is how we are to resolve the possible conflict between the automatic tendency to "mirror" and the need to perform different context-related complementary actions. By using single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation, we found that observation of a double-step action characterized by an implicit complementary request engendered a shift from symmetrical simulation to reciprocity in the participants' corticospinal activity. Accordingly, differential motor facilitation was revealed for the snapshots evoking imitative and complementary gestures despite the fact that the observed type of grasp was identical. Control conditions in which participants observed the same action sequence but in a context not implying a complementary request were included as well. The results provide compelling evidence that when an observed action calls for a nonidentical complementary action, an interplay between the automatic tendency to resonate with what is observed and to implicitly prepare for the complementary action does emerge. In other words, implicit complementary requests might have the ability to draw attention to specific features of the context affording nonidentical responses.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 83%

From simulation to reciprocity: The case of complementary actions

Sartori

Cavallo

Bucchioni

et al. 2012

Social Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, it may still exert an influence 1 . However, Gowen et al (2010) showed that the up/down priming from a finger was greater than that of a moving block, whether the observed moving finger was on the same side (viewing a mirror image left hand) or on the opposite side (viewing a right hand) as the right hand index finger they used to respond. Although the above studies indicate a priming component specific to biological stimuli, they do not rule out the possibility that this component is based on the principles of SRC.…”

Section: Compatiblementioning

confidence: 94%

“…Firstly, paradigms can be divided into those that measure compatibility of the type of movement or the effector that is moved (Gowen, Bradshaw, Galpin, Lawrence, & Poliakoff, 2010;Heyes, 2011; although see Press, Gherri, Heyes, & Eimer, 2010 for rare examples whether the two paradigms have been combined). For example, if one were making a press response with one's index finger, a movement compatibility effect would contrast viewing an index finger making a press response (compatible) with an index finger making a release response (incompatible).…”

Section: Measuring Visuomotor Primingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, Jansson et al (2007) repeated the Brass et al (2001) study, but presented biological and nonbiological stimuli in separate blocks, and found visuomotor priming effects in both cases. Poliakoff, Galpin, Dick, Moore, and Tipper (2007) and Gowen et al (2010) used a similar paradigm to Brass et al (2001), but asked participants to respond to the onset of an ''X'' go signal, following the observation of a moving finger or square. Poliakoff and colleagues found that priming was greater for the biological stimulus in a group of elderly participants, whereas Gowen et al (2010) observed significant priming for the biological stimulus only in a group of younger adults.…”

Section: Movement Compatibilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These results indicate that differentiation of the two stimulus types may be an active process. A further observation, that may be explained by attention, is that when trials of biological and non-biological stimuli are mixed within the same block of trials (Brass et al, 2001;Gowen et al, 2010;Kilner et al, 2003), priming for non-biological stimuli is more likely to be non-significant (Table 1). In contrast, when presented as separate blocks, priming is significant for non-biological stimuli (Brass et al, 2000;Jansson et al, 2007;Press et al, 2005;Stürmer et al, 2000).…”

Section: Top-down Factorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How does visuomotor priming differ for biological and non-biological stimuli? A review of the evidence

Gowen

Poliakoff

2012

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Visuomotor priming occurs when our actions are influenced by observing a compatible or incompatible action. Here we ask whether visuomotor priming is specific to human, biological actions or generalises to non-biological movements, such as abstract shapes or robots. Reviewing the evidence indicates that priming occurs for both types of stimuli and emphasises the contributions of both bottom-up (e.g. stimulus saliency, appearance, kinematics) and top-down (e.g. attention and prior knowledge) factors. We propose a model suggesting that although bottom-up features play a critical role, the degree of difference in priming for biological versus non-biological stimuli can be ultimately shaped by top-down factors.

show abstract

Intact Automatic Imitation and Typical Spatial Compatibility in Autism Spectrum Disorder: Challenging the Broken Mirror Theory

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A lack of imitative behavior is frequently described as a core feature of Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD), and is consistent with claims of mirror neuron system dysfunction in these individuals. Previous research has questioned this characterization of ASD however, arguing that when tests of automatic imitation are used--which do not require higher-level cognitive processing--imitative behavior is intact or even enhanced in individuals with ASD. In Experiment 1, 60 adult individuals with ASD and a matched Control group completed an automatic imitation task in which they were required to perform an index or a middle finger lift while observing a hand making either the same, or the alternate, finger movement. Both groups demonstrated a significant imitation effect whereby actions were executed faster when preceded by observation of the same action, than when preceded by the alternate action. The magnitude of this "imitation effect" was statistically indistinguishable in the ASD and Control groups. Experiment 2 utilized an improved automatic imitation paradigm to demonstrate that, when automatic imitation effects are isolated from those due to spatial compatibility, increasing autism symptom severity is associated with an increased tendency to imitate. Notably, there was no association between autism symptom severity and spatial compatibility, demonstrating the specificity of the link between ASD symptoms and increased imitation. These results provide evidence against claims of a lack of imitative behavior in ASD, and challenge the "Broken Mirror Theory of Autism."

show abstract

Exploring visuomotor priming following biological and non-biological stimuli

Cited by 28 publications

References 42 publications

From simulation to reciprocity: The case of complementary actions

From simulation to reciprocity: The case of complementary actions

How does visuomotor priming differ for biological and non-biological stimuli? A review of the evidence

Intact Automatic Imitation and Typical Spatial Compatibility in Autism Spectrum Disorder: Challenging the Broken Mirror Theory

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About