Pictures of you: Dot stimuli cause motor contagion in presence of a still human form

Sparks, Samuel; Sidari, Morgan J.; Lyons, M.; Kritikos, Ada

doi:10.1016/j.concog.2016.08.004

Cited by 7 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…There is evidence that these factors extend to priming of specific kinematics. Moving dot stimuli can induce trajectory priming in reach-to-grasp actions when visual context suggests that the dot represents a human hand's motion, whereas identical dot movements do not affect the observer's reach trajectories in the absence of such cues (Sparks, Sidari, et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Because the arm-waving paradigms are online tasks requiring simultaneous action observation and execution, participants would be tracking the model's hand simultaneously with executing their own actions. This contrasts with offline trajectory priming studies where participants alternate between observing and executing actions (Griffiths & Tipper, 2009Hardwick & Edwards, 2011;Sparks, Douglas, & Kritikos, 2016;Sparks, Sidari, et al, 2016). In some instantiations of the trajectory priming paradigm, participants can shift their covert and overt visual attention away from the model to their target object before or during action execution (Griffiths & Tipper, 2009Sparks, Douglas, & Kritikos, 2016;Sparks, Sidari, et al, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Existing trajectory priming studies vary in the relevant instructions. Participants have been instructed to: gaze at their upcoming reach target while observing the model in the periphery to time their own actions (Hardwick & Edwards, 2011); passively watch the model's reach and close then open their eyes before executing their own action (Griffiths & Tipper, 2009; carefully watch the model's hand because their grasp type was a go/no-go signal (Sparks, Douglas, & Kritikos, 2016) or fixate centrally while covertly attending to the spatial region of the model's hand for a go signal (Sparks, Sidari, et al, 2016). In most of these studies, the instructions specified or implied that participants should spatially and selectively attend to the model's action (Griffiths & Tipper, 2009Hardwick & Edwards, 2011;Sparks, Douglas, & Kritikos, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In most of these studies, the instructions specified or implied that participants should spatially and selectively attend to the model's action (Griffiths & Tipper, 2009Hardwick & Edwards, 2011;Sparks, Douglas, & Kritikos, 2016). Sparks, Sidari, et al (2016) instructed participants to attend selectively to a dot that traced the model's wrist, rather than to the model's action itself. Trajectory priming still occurred under these instructions, which suggests that selective attention to a human action may not be necessary for the effect.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Trajectory priming still occurred under these instructions, which suggests that selective attention to a human action may not be necessary for the effect. The instructions in Sparks, Sidari, et al (2016), however, still required that participants spatially attend to the relevant body site. Thus, it is currently unclear to what extent instructions regarding spatial and selective attention modulate trajectory priming in reach-to-grasp action.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Top-down attentional factors modulate action priming in reach-to-grasp action

Sparks

Lyons

Kritikos

2018

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous studies report that viewing exaggerated, high-lifting reaches (versus direct reaches) primes higher vertical deviation in wrist trajectory in the observer’s subsequent reaches (trajectory priming), but it is unclear to what extent this effect depends upon task instructions relevant to top-down attention. In two experiments, participants were instructed to gaze at a dot presented on a large monitor for a colour-change go signal that cued them to execute a direct reach to a target. In the background, the monitor also displayed life-sized films of a human model. The films were of the model either remaining still or reaching to grasp a target with either a direct trajectory or an exaggerated, high-lifting trajectory. When the dot traced the human model’s wrist throughout her movement, a robust trajectory priming effect emerged. When the dot remained stationary in a central location but the human model reached in the background, the human model’s trajectory did not alter the participants’ trajectories. Finally, when the dot traced exaggerated and direct trajectories and the human model remained stationary, the dot’s movement produced an attenuated, non-significant trajectory priming effect. These findings show that top-down attentional factors modulate trajectory priming. In addition, a moving non-human stimulus does not produce the same degree of action priming when contextual factors make salient its independence of human agency and/or intention.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Top-down attentional factors modulate action priming in reach-to-grasp action

Sparks

Lyons

Kritikos

2018

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Self-bias effect: movement initiation to self-owned property is speeded for both approach and avoidance actions

Barton

Constable²,

Sparks

et al. 2020

Psychological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recall of, and physical interaction with, self-owned items is privileged over items owned by other people (Constable et al, 2011;Cunningham et al, 2008). Here we investigate approach (towards the item), compared with avoidance (away from the item) movements to images of self-and experimenter-owned items. We asked if initiation time and movement duration of button-press approach responses to self-owned items are associated with a systematic self-bias (overall faster responses), compared with avoidance movements, similar to findings of paradigms investigating affective evaluation of (unowned) items.Participants were gifted mugs to use, and after a few days they completed an approachavoidance task (Chen & Bargh, 1999;Seibt et al, 2008;Truong et al, 2016) to images of their own or the Experimenter's mug, using either congruent or incongruent movement direction mappings. There was a self-bias effect for initiation time to the self-owned mug, for both congruent and incongruent mappings, and for movement duration in the congruent mapping. The effect was abolished in Experiment 2 when participants responded based on a shape on the handle rather than mug ownership. We speculate that ownership status requires conscious processing to modulate responses. Moreover, ownership status judgements and affective evaluation may employ different mechanisms.

show abstract

The ownership memory self-reference effect shifts recognition criterion but not recognition sensitivity

Sparks,

Kritikos

2024

Psychological Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Information referenced to the self is retrieved more accurately than information referenced to others, known as the memory self-reference effect. It is unclear, however, whether social context (identity of the other) or task factors alter decision-making processes. In a virtual object allocation task, female participants sorted objects into their own or another’s (stranger or mother) basket based on a colour cue. Subsequently, they performed a recognition memory task in which they first indicated whether each object was old or new, and then whether it had been allocated to themselves or to the other. We obtained owner-specific hit rates and false-alarm rates and applied signal detection theory to derive separate recognition sensitivity (d’) and recognition criterion parameters (c) for self- and other-owned objects. While there was no clear evidence of a recognition self-reference effect, or a change in sensitivity, participants adopted a more conservative recognition criterion for self- compared with other-owned objects, and particularly when the other-referent was the participant’s mother compared with the stranger. Moreover, when discriminating whether the originally presented objects were self- or other-owned, participants were biased toward ascribing ownership to the ‘other’. We speculate that these findings reflect ownership-based changes in decisional processing during the recognition memory self-reference paradigm.

show abstract

Pictures of you: Dot stimuli cause motor contagion in presence of a still human form

Cited by 7 publications

References 37 publications

Top-down attentional factors modulate action priming in reach-to-grasp action

Top-down attentional factors modulate action priming in reach-to-grasp action

Self-bias effect: movement initiation to self-owned property is speeded for both approach and avoidance actions

The ownership memory self-reference effect shifts recognition criterion but not recognition sensitivity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About