How a co-actor's (Un-) reliability modulates goal selection in a novel joint goal-setting paradigm.

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1007/s00426-024-02056-2
Felix J Götz, Gesine Dreisbach
{"title":"How a co-actor's (Un-) reliability modulates goal selection in a novel joint goal-setting paradigm.","authors":"Felix J Götz, Gesine Dreisbach","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-02056-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Sociomotor theory - an extension of ideomotor theory - suggests that actions can also be represented in terms of the effects they elicit from others. But what if those others violate one's action effect anticipations? Here, we introduce a novel joint goal-setting paradigm to investigate effects of co-actors' occasional and overall unreliability on an individual's goal selection. In a first step, the participant moved a target halfway from the bottom center to the top left or right corner of the computer screen. In the second step, the co-actor moved the target to its final left or right position. In a learning block, the co-actor always continued the participant's target movements. In the test block(s), the co-actor produced congruent action effects in 50% (unreliable) vs. 80% (reliable co-actor) of the trials. Experiment 1 consisted of one (between-participants), Experiment 2 and 3 of two (within-participants) test blocks; in Experiment 3, the co-actor changed between blocks. Results of Experiments 1 and 3 reveal that participants repeated their corner choice more often after incongruent trials, but only when the co-actor was generally reliable. Implications in terms of sociomotor action control and joint action are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":"89 1","pages":"18"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11567990/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-02056-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Sociomotor theory - an extension of ideomotor theory - suggests that actions can also be represented in terms of the effects they elicit from others. But what if those others violate one's action effect anticipations? Here, we introduce a novel joint goal-setting paradigm to investigate effects of co-actors' occasional and overall unreliability on an individual's goal selection. In a first step, the participant moved a target halfway from the bottom center to the top left or right corner of the computer screen. In the second step, the co-actor moved the target to its final left or right position. In a learning block, the co-actor always continued the participant's target movements. In the test block(s), the co-actor produced congruent action effects in 50% (unreliable) vs. 80% (reliable co-actor) of the trials. Experiment 1 consisted of one (between-participants), Experiment 2 and 3 of two (within-participants) test blocks; in Experiment 3, the co-actor changed between blocks. Results of Experiments 1 and 3 reveal that participants repeated their corner choice more often after incongruent trials, but only when the co-actor was generally reliable. Implications in terms of sociomotor action control and joint action are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在新颖的联合目标设定范式中,共同行为者的(非)可靠性如何调节目标选择。
社会运动理论--意念运动理论的延伸--表明,行动也可以用它们从他人那里引起的效果来表示。但是,如果他人违反了自己的行动效果预期呢?在这里,我们引入了一个新颖的联合目标设定范例,以研究共同行动者的偶然性和整体不可靠性对个体目标选择的影响。第一步,被试将一个目标从计算机屏幕的底部中心向左上角或右上角移动一半。在第二步中,合作者将目标移动到最终的左侧或右侧位置。在学习区块中,合作者总是继续参与者的目标移动。在测试块中,合作者在 50%(不可靠)与 80%(可靠的合作者)的试验中产生了一致的动作效果。实验 1 包括一个(参与者之间)测试块,实验 2 和实验 3 包括两个(参与者内部)测试块;在实验 3 中,合作者在测试块之间发生了变化。实验 1 和实验 3 的结果显示,在不一致的试验后,参与者会更频繁地重复他们的角落选择,但只有当共同行为者总体上可靠时才会出现这种情况。本文讨论了社会运动动作控制和联合行动的意义。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
期刊最新文献
Linguistic markedness and body specificity in parity judgments: evidence from a go/no-go task. Motion in the depth direction appears faster when the target is closer to the observer. Beneficial effects of imagination of successful action after an actual error on baseline performances in non-expert young tennis players. A systematic review of human odometry. Different effects of smooth pursuit eye movements on motion-based stimulus response congruency.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1