What’s in a Friendship? Partner Visibility Supports Cognitive Collaboration between Friends

Brennan, Allison; Enns, James T.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0143469

Cited by 23 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, such a measure could be applied across a company to achieve success among colleagues who are unfamiliar with each other or are from different departments, but need to collaborate on a task. On the other hand, Brennan and Enns (2015) found a relationship between familiarity and visibility of a partner when performing a visuospatial task. Familiar pairs were reported to outperform unfamiliar pairs when visible to each other, but when separated by a partition, familiar and unfamiliar pairs performed similarly.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision-making

Baumgart

Byvshev

Sliby

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans frequently coordinate with others in daily life. A recent study on perceptual decisionmaking showed that dyad members with similar individual performances attain a higher joint performance than the better dyad member (i.e., a collective benefit). However, little is known about the physiological basis of these results. Here, we replicate this earlier work and also investigate the neurophysiological correlates of decision-making using EEG.In a two interval forced choice task, co-actors individually indicated presence of a target stimulus with a higher contrast and then indicated their confidence on a rating scale. Viewing the individual ratings, dyads made a joint decision. Replicating earlier work, we found a positive correlation between the similarity of individual performances and collective benefit.We analyzed event related potentials (ERPs) in three phases (i.e., stimulus onset, response, and feedback) using explorative cluster mass permutation tests. At stimulus onset, ERPs were significantly linearly related to our manipulation of contrast differences, validating our manipulation of task difficulty. For individual and joint responses, we found a significant centroparietal error-related positivity for correct versus incorrect responses, which suggests that accuracy is already evaluated at the response level. At feedback presentation, we found a significant late positive fronto-central potential elicited by incorrect joint responses, suggesting a stronger emotional response to negative as compared to positive feedback. In sum, these results demonstrate that response-and feedback-related components elicited by an error-monitoring system differentially integrate conflicting information exchanged during the joint decisionmaking process.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision-making

Baumgart

Byvshev

Sliby

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, such a measure could be applied across a company to achieve success among colleagues who are unfamiliar with each other or are from different departments, but need to collaborate on a task. On the other hand, Brennan and Enns () found a relationship between familiarity and visibility of a partner when performing a joint visual search task. Familiar pairs were reported to outperform unfamiliar pairs when visible to each other, but when separated by a partition, familiar and unfamiliar pairs performed similarly.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision‐making

Baumgart

Byvshev

Sliby

et al. 2019

Eur J of Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

S max , ratio of sensitivity between dyad and best member; S dyad , dyad slope; S max , slope of the more sensitive participant (best member) in a dyad; S min /S max , ratio of individual sensitivity similarity; WCS, weighted confidence sharing. AbstractHumans frequently perform tasks collaboratively in daily life. Collaborating with others may or may not result in higher task performance than if one were to complete the task alone (i.e., a collective benefit). A recent study on collective benefits in perceptual decision-making showed that dyad members with similar individual performances attain collective benefit. However, little is known about the physiological basis of these results. Here, we replicate this earlier work and also investigate the neurophysiological correlates of decision-making using EEG. In a two-interval forced-choice task, co-actors individually indicated presence of a target stimulus with a higher contrast and then indicated their confidence on a rating scale. Viewing the individual ratings, dyads made a joint decision. Replicating earlier work, we found a positive correlation between the similarity of individual performances and collective benefit. We analyzed event-related potentials (ERPs) in three phases (i.e., stimulus onset, response and feedback) using explorative cluster mass permutation tests. At stimulus onset, ERPs were significantly linearly related to our manipulation of contrast differences,

show abstract

“…However, in a different study, Brennan and Enns found that dyads in a joint visual search task who were allowed to verbally communicate were still able to reach a collective benefit and attain a collaborative benefit. In a follow‐up study, Brennan and Enns extended their work and investigated how the social relation between members of a group (i.e., if they are friends or not) can affect the joint performance. They found that friends outperformed nonfriends if they were visible to each other, suggesting that the social relationship between members of a group is another factor that affects joint performance.…”

Section: Joint Visuospatial Tasksmentioning

confidence: 99%

Group benefits in joint perceptual tasks—a review

Wahn

Kingstone

König

2018

Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In daily life, humans often perform perceptual tasks together to reach a shared goal. In these situations, individuals may collaborate (e.g., by distributing task demands) to perform the task better than when the task is performed alone (i.e., attain a group benefit). In this review, we identify the factors influencing if, and to what extent, a group benefit is attained and provide a framework of measures to assess group benefits in perceptual tasks. In particular, we integrate findings from two frequently investigated joint perceptual tasks: visuospatial tasks and decision-making tasks. For both task types, we find that an exchange of information between coactors is critical to improve joint performance. Yet, the type of exchanged information and how coactors collaborate differs between tasks. In visuospatial tasks, coactors exchange information about the performed actions to distribute task demands. In perceptual decision-making tasks, coactors exchange their confidence on their individual perceptual judgments to negotiate a joint decision. We argue that these differences can be explained by the task structure: coactors distribute task demands if a joint task allows for a spatial division and stimuli can be accurately processed by one individual. Otherwise, they perform the task individually and then integrate their individual judgments.

show abstract

What’s in a Friendship? Partner Visibility Supports Cognitive Collaboration between Friends

Cited by 23 publications

References 37 publications

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision-making

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision-making

Neurophysiological correlates of collective perceptual decision‐making

Group benefits in joint perceptual tasks—a review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About