Sullivan Philip, Blacker Mishka
Department of Kinesiology, Brock University, St. CatharinesON, Canada.
Front Psychol. 2017 Jun 22;8:1034. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01034. eCollection 2017.
Behavioral synchrony has been linked to endorphin activity (Cohen et al., 2010; Sullivan and Rickers, 2013; Sullivan et al., 2014; Tarr et al., 2015, 2016; Weinstein et al., 2016). This has been called the synchrony effect. Synchrony has two dominant phases of movement; in-phase and anti-phase. The majority of research investigating synchrony's effect on endorphin activity has focused on in-phase synchrony following vigorous activities. The only research to investigate the effects of anti-phase synchrony on endorphin activity found that anti-phase synchronized rowing did not produce the synchrony effect (Sullivan et al., 2014). Anti-phase synchrony, however, is counter-intuitive to the sport of rowing and may have interfered with the synchrony effect. This study investigated the effect of anti-phase synchrony on endorphin activity in a different task (i.e., drumming). University students ( = 30) were asked to drum solo and in in-phase and anti-phase pairs for 3 min. Pain threshold was assessed as an indirect indicator of endorphin activity prior to and following the task. Although the in-phase synchrony effect was not found, a repeated measures ANOVA found that there was a significant difference in pain threshold change among the three conditions [(2,24) = 4.10, = 0.255, < 0.05). -tests showed that the anti-phase condition had a significantly greater pain threshold change than both the solo and in-phase conditions at < 0.05. This is the first time that anti-phase synchrony has been shown to produce the synchrony effect. Because anti-phase drumming may have required more attention between partners than in-phase synchrony, it may have affected self-other merging (Tarr et al., 2014). These results support Tarr et al.'s (2014) model that multiple mechanisms account for the effect of synchrony on pain threshold, and suggest that different characteristics of the activity may influence the synchrony effect.
行为同步与内啡肽活性有关（科恩等人，2010年；沙利文和里克斯，2013年；沙利文等人，2014年；塔尔等人，2015年、2016年；温斯坦等人，2016年）。这被称为同步效应。同步有两个主要的运动阶段：同相和反相。大多数研究同步对内啡肽活性影响的研究都集中在剧烈活动后的同相同步上。唯一一项研究反相同步对内啡肽活性影响的研究发现，反相同步划船并未产生同步效应（沙利文等人，2014年）。然而，反相同步与划船运动的直觉相悖，可能干扰了同步效应。本研究调查了反相同步在不同任务（即击鼓）中对内啡肽活性的影响。大学生（n = 30）被要求单独击鼓，以及以同相和反相配对的方式击鼓3分钟。在任务前后，疼痛阈值作为内啡肽活性的间接指标进行评估。尽管未发现同相同步效应，但重复测量方差分析发现，三种条件下的疼痛阈值变化存在显著差异[F(2,24) = 4.10，p = 0.255，p < 0.05]。t检验表明，在p < 0.05时，反相条件下的疼痛阈值变化显著大于单独击鼓和同相条件。这是首次证明反相同步会产生同步效应。由于反相击鼓可能比同相同步需要伙伴之间更多的注意力，它可能影响了自我与他人的融合（塔尔等人，2014年）。这些结果支持了塔尔等人（2014年）的模型，即多种机制解释了同步对疼痛阈值的影响，并表明活动的不同特征可能影响同步效应。
