Ouwehand P Elma W, Peper C Lieke E
MOVE Research Institute Amsterdam, Department of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
MOVE Research Institute Amsterdam, Department of Human Movement Sciences, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Neurosci Lett. 2015 Oct 8;606:177-81. doi: 10.1016/j.neulet.2015.08.052. Epub 2015 Aug 29.
We examined whether movement synchronization is different during coordination with another person than during coordination with a moving object. In addition, the influence of belief in the other person's agency was assessed. Participants synchronized their lower-arm movements with a computer-controlled rhythmic reference movement. The reference movements were pre-recorded, biological movements and were identical in all conditions. They were presented either by means of a confederate's arm in a motor-driven manipulandum or by means of movements of the manipulandum alone. To assess the influence of the belief in the confederate's agency, participants either were or were not informed that the confederate's movements were motor driven. The strength of coupling between the participant's movements and the reference movements was assessed in terms of the standard deviation of relative phase and the time needed to re-establish the coordination pattern after an unexpected perturbation of the reference signal. Mean relative phase indicated whether the participant was leading or lagging the reference movements. Coupling strength was not affected by the presence of another person in the coordination task, nor by the belief in this person's agency. However, participants had a stronger tendency to lead while synchronizing with the manipulandum, indicating that they responded differently to the observed kinematics of this moving object than to the kinematics of the confederate's arm movements, at least when the confederate's agency was assumed. Hence, although neither the involvement of another person nor the participant's belief in this person's agency affected coupling strength, the form of the coupling seemed to be influenced by the former factor, suggesting a different attunement to the reference movements during a joint-action situation. Future research is required to determine whether these interpretations extend to unintentional and bidirectional coordination, in which agency is not only assumed but actually effectuated.
我们研究了与他人协调时的动作同步是否与与移动物体协调时不同。此外，还评估了对他人能动性的信念的影响。参与者将其前臂动作与计算机控制的有节奏的参考动作同步。参考动作是预先录制的生物动作，在所有条件下都是相同的。它们通过在电动操作器中的同谋者的手臂呈现，或者仅通过操作器的动作呈现。为了评估对同谋者能动性信念的影响，参与者被告知或未被告知同谋者的动作是由电机驱动的。根据相对相位的标准差以及在参考信号意外扰动后重新建立协调模式所需的时间，评估参与者动作与参考动作之间的耦合强度。平均相对相位表明参与者是领先还是落后于参考动作。耦合强度不受协调任务中他人的存在的影响，也不受对这个人能动性的信念的影响。然而，参与者在与操作器同步时有更强的领先倾向，这表明他们对观察到的这个移动物体的运动学的反应与对同谋者手臂动作的运动学的反应不同，至少在假定同谋者具有能动性时是这样。因此，尽管他人的参与和参与者对这个人能动性的信念都没有影响耦合强度，但耦合的形式似乎受到前一个因素的影响，这表明在联合行动情境中对参考动作有不同的协调。需要进一步的研究来确定这些解释是否适用于无意的和双向的协调，在这种协调中，能动性不仅是假定的，而且实际上是实现的。
