Until recently, it was assumed that co-representation of others’ actions, an essential part in joint action, is biologically tuned. However, research demonstrated that we also simulate actions of non-biological interaction partners under certain conditions. In the present study, we investigated whether perceived intentionality or perspective taking is the underlying mechanisms of this phenomenon. Participants saw a short video fragment of a non-biological agent (i.e. a triangle) as main character. The movements of this agent were either described as intentional or as unintentional. Furthermore, participants were instructed to either take the perspective of this non-biological agent or not. Results show that perspective taking and perceived intentionality both lead to action co-representation of non-biological actions. Possible explanations for these findings are discussed.
(2007) Persuasive effects of fictional narratives increase over time. Media Psychology, 101, 113–134.
Aron, A., Aron, E.N., Tudor, M., & Nelson, G
(1991) Close relationships as including other in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 601, 241–253.
Brass, M., Bekkering, H. & Prinz, W
(2001) Movement observation affects movement execution in a simple response task. Acta Psychologica, 1061, 3–22.
Böckler, A., Knoblich, G., & Sebanz, N
(2012) Effects of a coactor’s focus of attention on task performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 381, 1404–1415.
Böckler, A., & Zwickel, J
(2013) Influences of spontaneous perspective taking on spatial and identity processing of faces. Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience, 81, 735–740.
Burgoon, J.K., Bonito, J.A., Bengtsson, B., Cederberg, C., Lundeberg, M., & Allspach, L
(2000) Interactivity in human-computer interaction: A study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 161, 553–574.
Castelli, F., Happé, F., Frith, U., & Frith, C
(2000) Movement and mind: A functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. Neuroimage, 121, 314–325.
Colzato, L.S., de Bruijn, E., & Hommel, B
(2012a) Up to “me” or up to “us”? The impact of self-construal priming on cognitive self-other integration. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 341.
Colzato, L.S., Zech, H., Hommel, B., Verdonschot, R., van den Wildenberg, W., & Hsieh, S
(2012b) Lovingkindness brings lovingkindness: The impact of Buddhism on cognitive self-other integration. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 191, 541–545.
Cross, E.S., Liepelt, R., de C Hamilton, A.F., Parkinson, J., Ramsey, R., Stadler, W., & Prinz, W
(2012) Robotic movement preferentially engages the action observation network. Human Brain Mapping, 91, 2238–2254.
Dijksterhuis, A., & Bargh, J.A
(2001) The perception-behavior expressway: Automatic effects of social perception on social behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 331, 1–40.
Dittrich, K., Rothe, A., & Klauer, K.C
(2012) Increased spatial salience in the social Simon task: A response-coding account of spatial compatibility effects. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 741, 911–929.
Dolk, T., Hommel, B., Colzato, L.S., Schütz-Bosback, S., Prinz, W., & Liepelt, R
(2011) How “social“ is the social Simon effect?Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 84.
Dolk, T., Hommel, B., Prinz, W., & Liepelt, R
(2013) The (not so) Social Simon effect: A referential coding account. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 391, 1248–1260.
Dolk, T., Liepelt, R., Prinz, W., & Fiehler, K
(2013) Visual experience determines the use of external reference frames in joint action control. PLoS One, 81, e59008.
Fukuda, H., & Ueda, K
(2010) Interaction with a moving object affects one’s perception of its animacy. International Journal of Social Robotics, 21, 187–193.
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J.T
(2007) On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism. Psychological Review, 1141, 864–886.
Gazzola, V., Rizzolatti, G., Wicker, B., & Keysers, C
(2007) The anthropomorphic brain: The mirror neuron system responds to human and robotic actions. NeuroImage, 351, 1674–1684.
Green, M.C., & Brock, T.C
(2000) The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 291, 701–721.
Green, M.C., Brock, T.C., & Kaufman, G.F
(2004) Understanding media enjoyment: The role of transportation into narrative worlds. Communication Theory, 141, 311–327.
Guagnano, D., Rusconi, E., & Umiltà, C.A
(2010) Sharing a task or sharing a space? On the effect of the confederate in action coding in a detection task. Cognition, 1141, 348–355.
Hard, B.M., Tversky, B., & Lang, D.S
(2006) Making sense of abstract events: Building event schemas. Memory & Cognition, 141, 1221–1253.
Hommel, B., Colzato, L.S., & van den Wildenberg, W.P.M
(2009) How social are task representations?Psychological Science, 71, 794–798.
Kilner, J.M., Paulignan, Y., & Blakemore, S.J
(2003) An interference effect of observed biological movement on action. Current Biology, 131, 522–525.
Liepelt, R., & Brass, M
(2010) Top-down modulation of motor priming by belief about animacy. Experimental Psychology, 571, 221–227.
Liepelt, R., Schneider, J.C., Aichert, D., Wöstmann, N., Dehning, S., Möller, H.J., Riedel, M., Dolk, T., & Ettinger, U
(2013) Effects of feature integration in a hands-crossed version of the social simon paradigm. Psychological Research, 771, 240–248.
Müller, B.C.N., Brass, M., Kühn, S., Tsai, C.-C., Nieuwboer, W., Dijksterhuis, A., & van Baaren, R.B
(2011a) When Pinocchio acts like a human, a wooden hand becomes embodied. Action co-representation for non-biological agents. Neuropsychologia, 491, 1373–1377.
Müller, B.C.N., Kühn, S., van Baaren, R.B., Dotsch, R., Brass, M., & Dijksterhuis, A
(2011b) Perspective taking eliminates differences in co-representation of out-group members’ actions. Experimental Brain Research, 2111, 423–428.
Müller, B.C.N., van Baaren, R.B., van Someren, D.H., & Dijksterhuis, A
(2014) A present for Pinocchio: On when non-biological agents become real. Social Cognition, 321, 382–396.
Press, C
(2011) Action observation and robotic agents: Learning and anthropomorphism. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 351, 1410–1418.
Prinz, W
(1997) Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 91, 129–154.
Ramnani, N., & Miall, R.C
(2004) A system in the human brain for predicting the actions of others. Nature Neuroscience, 71, 85–90.
Ramsey, R., & Hamilton de, C.A.F
(2010) Triangles have goals too: Understanding action representation in lef aIPS. Neuropsychologia, 481, 2773–2776.
(2010) Seeing it their way: Evidence for rapid and involuntary computation of what other people see. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 361, 1255–1266.
Schneider, E.F., Lang, A., Shin, M., & Bradley, S.D
(2004) Death with a story: How story impacts emotional, motivational, and physiological responses to first-person shooter video games. Human Communication Research, 301, 361–375.
(2005) Activation in posterior superior temporal sulcus parallels parameter inducing the percept of animacy. Neuron, 451, 625–635.
Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., & Knoblich, G
(2006) Joint action: Bodies and minds moving together. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 101, 70–76.
Sebanz, N., Knoblich, G., & Prinz, W
(2003) Representing others’ actions: Just like one’s own?Cognition, 81, 11–21.
Stezel, A., Chinellato, E., del Pobil, Á.P., Lappe, M., & Liepelt, R
(2013) How deeply do we include robotic agents in the self?International Journal of Humanoid robotics, 101, 1–13.
Stenzel, A., Chinellato, E., Tirado Bou, M.A., del Pobil, Á.P., Lappe, M., & Liepelt, R
(2012) When humanoid robots become human-like interaction partners: Co-representation of robotic actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 381, 1073–1077.
Stosic, M., Brass, M., van Hoeck, N., Ma, N., & van Overwalle, F
(2014) Understanding simple goal-directed actions of shapes: The role of agency in mirror system activation. NeuroImage, 861, 264–269.
Tai, Y.F., Scherfler, C., Brooks, D.J., Sawamoto, N., & Castiello, U
(2004) The human premotor cortex is ‘mirror’ only for biological actions. Current Biology, 141, 117–120.
Teufel, C., Fletcher, P.C., & Davis, G (2010) Seeing other minds: Attributed mental states influence perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 141, 376–382.
Tsai, C.-C., & Brass, M
(2007) Does the human motor system simulates Pinocchio’s actions? Coaction with a human hand versus a wooden hand in a dyadic interaction. Psychological Science, 181, 1058–1062.
2024. Fake human but real influencer: the interplay of authenticity and humanlikeness in Virtual Influencer communication?. Fashion and Textiles 11:1
van der Weiden, Anouk, Emanuele Porcu & Roman Liepelt
2023. Action prediction modulates self–other integration in joint action. Psychological Research 87:2 ► pp. 537 ff.
Mcgeough, Julienne, Thomas Gallagher-Mitchell, Dan Philip Andrew Clark & Neil Harrison
2021. Reliability and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) of a Paper- Versus App-Administered Resilience Scale in Scottish Youths: Comparative Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth 9:12 ► pp. e11055 ff.
Müller, Barbara C. N., Xin Gao, Sari R. R. Nijssen & Tom G. E. Damen
2021. I, Robot: How Human Appearance and Mind Attribution Relate to the Perceived Danger of Robots. International Journal of Social Robotics 13:4 ► pp. 691 ff.
Nijssen, Sari R.R., Carolina Pletti, Markus Paulus & Barbara C.N. Müller
2021. Does agency matter? Neural processing of robotic movements in 4- and 8-year olds. Neuropsychologia 157 ► pp. 107853 ff.
Sangati, Ekaterina, Marc Slors, Barbara C. N. Müller, Iris van Rooij & Sam Gilbert
2021. Joint Simon effect in movement trajectories. PLOS ONE 16:12 ► pp. e0261735 ff.
Müller, Barbara C. N., Shengnan Chen, Sari R. R. Nijssen, Simone Kühn & Thomas A Stoffregen
2018. How (not) to increase older adults’ tendency to anthropomorphise in serious games. PLOS ONE 13:7 ► pp. e0199948 ff.
van der Weiden, Anouk, Henk Aarts, Merel Prikken & Neeltje E. M. van Haren
2016. Individual differences in action co-representation: not personal distress or subclinical psychotic experiences but sex composition modulates joint action performance. Experimental Brain Research 234:2 ► pp. 499 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.