Dataset Information

Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action.

ABSTRACT: What mechanisms distinguish interactive from non-interactive actions? To answer this question we tested participants while they took turns playing music with a virtual partner: in the interactive joint action condition, the participants played a melody together with their partner by grasping (C note) or pressing (G note) a cube-shaped instrument, alternating in playing one note each. In the non-interactive control condition, players' behavior was not guided by a shared melody, so that the partner's actions and notes were irrelevant to the participant. In both conditions, the participant's and partner's actions were physically congruent (e.g., grasp-grasp) or incongruent (e.g., grasp-point), and the partner's association between actions and notes was coherent with the participant's or reversed. Performance in the non-interactive condition was only affected by physical incongruence, whereas joint action was only affected when the partner's action-note associations were reversed. This shows that task interactivity shapes the sensorimotor coding of others' behaviors, and that joint action is based on active prediction of the partner's action effects rather than on passive action imitation. We suggest that such predictions are based on Dyadic Motor Plans that represent both the agent's and the partner's contributions to the interaction goal, like playing a melody together.

SUBMITTER: Sacheli LM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5864721 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action.

Sacheli Lucia Maria LM Arcangeli Elisa E Paulesu Eraldo E

Scientific reports 20180322 1

What mechanisms distinguish interactive from non-interactive actions? To answer this question we tested participants while they took turns playing music with a virtual partner: in the interactive joint action condition, the participants played a melody together with their partner by grasping (C note) or pressing (G note) a cube-shaped instrument, alternating in playing one note each. In the non-interactive control condition, players' behavior was not guided by a shared melody, so that the partne ...[more]

PMID: 29567946

Similar Datasets

Project description:Motor learning studies demonstrate that an individual's natural motor variability predicts the rate at which she learns a motor task. Individuals exhibiting higher variability learn motor tasks faster, presumably because variability fosters exploration of a wider space of motor parameters. However, it is unclear how individuals regulate variability while learning a motor task together with a partner who perturbs their movements. In the current study, we investigated whether and how variability affects performance and learning in such joint actions. Participants learned to jointly perform a sequence of movements with a confederate who was either highly variable or less variable in her movements. A haptic coupling between the actors led to translation of partner's movement variability into a force perturbation. We tested how the variability and predictability of force perturbations coming from a partner foster or hamper individual and joint performance. In experiment 1, the confederate produced more or less variable range of force perturbations that occurred in an unpredictable order. In experiment 2, the confederate produced more or less variable force perturbations in a predictable order. In experiment 3, the confederate produced more or less variable force perturbations in which the magnitude of force delivered was predictable whereas the direction of the force was unpredictable. We analysed individual performance, measured as movement accuracy and joint performance, measured as interpersonal asynchrony. Results indicated that in all three experiments, participants successfully regulated the variability of their own movements. However, individual performance was worse when partner produced highly variable force perturbations in an unpredictable order. Interestingly, predictability of force perturbations offset the detrimental effects of variability on individual performance. Furthermore, participants in the high variability condition achieved higher flexibility and resilience for a wide range of force perturbations, when the partner produced predictable movements. Participants improved their joint performance with a highly variable partner only when the partner produced partially predictable movements. Our results indicate that individuals involved in a joint action selectively rely on either their own or their partner's variability (or both) for benefitting individual and joint action performance, depending on the predictability of the partner' movements.

Project description:BackgroundEnhancing physical activity in overweight and obese individuals is an important means to promote health in this target population. The Health Action Process Approach (HAPA), which was the theoretical framework of this study, focuses on individual self-regulation variables for successful health behavior change. One key self-regulation variable of this model is action control with its three subfacets awareness of intentions, self-monitoring and regulatory effort. The social context of individuals, however, is usually neglected in common health behavior change theories. In order to integrate social influences into the HAPA, this randomized controlled trial investigated the effectiveness of a dyadic conceptualization of action control for promoting physical activity.Methods/designThis protocol describes the design of a single-blind randomized controlled trial, which comprises four experimental groups: a dyadic action control group, an individual action control group and two control groups. Participants of this study are overweight or obese, heterosexual adult couples who intend to increase their physical activity. Blocking as means of a gender-balanced randomization is used to allocate couples to conditions and partners to either being the target person of the intervention or to the partner condition. The ecological momentary intervention takes place in the first 14 days after baseline assessment and is followed by another 14 days diary phase without intervention. Follow-ups are one month and six months later. Subsequent to the six-months follow-up another 14 days diary phase takes place.The main outcome measures are self-reported and accelerometer-assessed physical activity. Secondary outcome measures are Body Mass Index (BMI), aerobic fitness and habitual physical activity.DiscussionThis is the first study examining a dyadic action control intervention in comparison to an individual action control condition and two control groups applying a single-blind randomized control trial. Challenges with running couples studies as well as advantages and disadvantages of certain design-related decisions are discussed. This RCT was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (PP00P1_133632/1) and was registered on 27/04/2012 at http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN15705531.

Project description:BackgroundLong-standing randomised controlled trial (RCT) evidence indicates that asthma action plans can improve patient outcomes. Internationally, however, these plans are seldom issued by professionals or used by patients/carers. To understand how the benefits of such plans might be realised clinically, we previously investigated barriers and facilitators to their implementation in a systematic review of relevant RCTs and synthesised qualitative studies exploring professional and patient/carer views. Our final step was to integrate these two separate studies.MethodsFirst, a theoretical model of action plan implementation was proposed, derived from our synthesis of 19 qualitative studies, identifying elements which, if incorporated into future interventions, could promote their use. Second, 14 RCTs included in the quantitative synthesis were re-analysed to assess the extent to which these elements were present within their interventions (that is, 'strong', 'weak' or 'no' presence) and with what effect. Matrices charted each element's presence and strength, facilitating analysis of element presence and action plan implementation.ResultsFour elements (professional education, patient/carer education, (patient/carer and professional) partnership working and communication) were identified in our model as likely to promote asthma plan use. Thirteen interventions reporting increased action plan implementation contained all four elements, with two or more strongly present. One intervention reporting no effect on action plan implementation contained only weakly present elements. Intervention effectiveness was reported using a narrow range of criteria which did not fully reflect the four elements. For example, no study assessed whether jointly developed action plans increased use. Whilst important from the professional and patient/carer perspectives, the integral role of these elements in intervention delivery and their effect on study outcomes was under-acknowledged in these RCTs.ConclusionsOur novel approach provides an evidence-base for future action plan interventions. Such interventions need to ensure all elements in our implementation model (patient/carer and professional education to support development of effective partnership working and communication) are strongly present within them and a wider range of criteria better reflecting the realities of clinical practice and living with asthma are used to measure their effectiveness. We now intend to test such a complex intervention using a cluster trial design.

Dataset Information

Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action.

Publications

Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets