IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0046728.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automatic Imitation in Rhythmical Actions: Kinematic Fidelity and the Effects of Compatibility, Delay, and Visual Monitoring

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel L Eaves
  • Martine Turgeon
  • Stefan Vogt

Abstract

We demonstrate that observation of everyday rhythmical actions biases subsequent motor execution of the same and of different actions, using a paradigm where the observed actions were irrelevant for action execution. The cycle time of the distractor actions was subtly manipulated across trials, and the cycle time of motor responses served as the main dependent measure. Although distractor frequencies reliably biased response cycle times, this imitation bias was only a small fraction of the modulations in distractor speed, as well as of the modulations produced when participants intentionally imitated the observed rhythms. Importantly, this bias was not only present for compatible actions, but was also found, though numerically reduced, when distractor and executed actions were different (e.g., tooth brushing vs. window wiping), or when the dominant plane of movement was different (horizontal vs. vertical). In addition, these effects were equally pronounced for execution at 0, 4, and 8 s after action observation, a finding that contrasts with the more short-lived effects reported in earlier studies. The imitation bias was also unaffected when vision of the hand was occluded during execution, indicating that this effect most likely resulted from visuomotor interactions during distractor observation, rather than from visual monitoring and guidance during execution. Finally, when the distractor was incompatible in both dimensions (action type and plane) the imitation bias was not reduced further, in an additive way, relative to the single-incompatible conditions. This points to a mechanism whereby the observed action’s impact on motor processing is generally reduced whenever this is not useful for motor planning. We interpret these findings in the framework of biased competition, where intended and distractor actions can be represented as competing and quasi-encapsulated sensorimotor streams.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel L Eaves & Martine Turgeon & Stefan Vogt, 2012. "Automatic Imitation in Rhythmical Actions: Kinematic Fidelity and the Effects of Compatibility, Delay, and Visual Monitoring," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(10), pages 1-12, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0046728
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0046728
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046728
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0046728&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0046728?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberta Ronchi & Patrice Revol & Masahiro Katayama & Yves Rossetti & Alessandro Farnè, 2011. "Seeing Your Error Alters My Pointing: Observing Systematic Pointing Errors Induces Sensori-Motor After-Effects," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(6), pages 1-9, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0046728. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.