Evidence for a dyadic motor plan in joint action

Joint actions often require agents to track others' actions while planning and executing physically incongruent actions of their own. previous research has indicated that this can lead to visuomotor interference effects when it occurs outside of joint action. How is this avoided or overcome in joint actions? We hypothesized that when joint action partners represent their actions as interrelated components of a plan to bring about a joint action goal, each partner's movements need not be represented in relation to distinct, incongruent proximal goals. instead they can be represented in relation to a single proximal goal-especially if the movements are, or appear to be, mechanically linked to a more distal joint action goal. To test this, we implemented a paradigm in which participants produced finger movements that were either congruent or incongruent with those of a virtual partner, and either with or without a joint action goal (the joint flipping of a switch, which turned on two light bulbs). Our findings provide partial support for the hypothesis that visuomotor interference effects can be reduced when two physically incongruent actions are represented as mechanically interdependent contributions to a joint action goal. From handshakes to music-making, dance and team sports, social interactions often require an efficient means of tracking others' actions while simultaneously planning and executing actions of one's own 1. A basketball player, for example, must monitor and anticipate her teammate's movements in order to successfully contribute to a pick and roll play. Given the broad range of social interactions in which it is important to anticipate, monitor and respond to others' actions, it is no surprise that a considerable amount of research has been devoted to investigating how we achieve this 2-5. An influential idea that has emerged is that the representation of others' actions is often supported by one's own motor system, implying that representations of others' actions are often functionally equivalent to the representations involved in action production 2-4,6,7. As a result, the observation of others' actions can result in action representations that do not clearly distinguish self from other 8-10. An upshot is that the observation of others' actions can give rise to representations that interfere with one's own task performance. In a striking illustration of this, Brass et al. 2 found that participants who were instructed to produce finger movements in response to symbolic cues responded more quickly when simultaneously observing irrelevant finger movements that were physically congruent to the ones they were instructed to produce, and more slowly when simultaneously observing irrelevant finger movements that were physically incongruent to these. These findings-and others that build on them 11-13-are taken to indicate that, when observing others' actions, we automatically represent those actions using motor representations of the same type as those subserv-ing action production. This neatly explains why the observation of congruent actions facilitates task performance, while the observation of incongruent actions leads to visuomotor interference effects. However, it also raises a challenge. This is because many joint actions require individuals to produce physically incongruent yet complementary actions 14 .

Scientific Reports, 2019

Joint actions often require agents to track others' actions while planning and executing physically incongruent actions of their own. Previous research has indicated that this can lead to visuomotor interference when it occurs outside of joint action. How is such visuomotor interference avoided or overcome in joint actions? We hypothesized that when joint action partners represent their actions as interrelated components of a plan to bring about a joint action goal, each partner's movements need not be represented in relation to distinct, incongruent proximal goals. Instead they can be represented in relation to a single proximal goal – especially if the movements are, or appear to be, mechanically linked to a more distal joint action goal. To test this, we implemented a paradigm in which participants produced finger movements that were either congruent or incongruent with those of a virtual partner, and either with or without a joint action goal (the joint flipping of a swi...

Psychological research, 2018

Automatic imitation of observed actions is thought to be a powerful mechanism, one that may mediate the reward value of interpersonal interactions, but that could also generate visuo-motor interference when interactions involve complementary movements. Since interpersonal coordination seems to be crucial both when cooperating and competing with others, the questions arises as to whether imitation-and thus visuo-motor interference-occurs in both scenarios. To address this issue, we asked human participants to engage in high- or low-interactive (Interactive or Cued condition, respectively), cooperative or competitive, joint reach-to-grasps with a virtual partner. More specifically, interactions occurred in: (i) a Cued condition, where participants simply adapted their movement timing to synchronize with (during cooperation) or anticipate (during competition) the virtual partner's grasp; (ii) an Interactive condition requiring the same adaptation, as well as a real-time selection o...

The capacity to distinguish between one's own and others' behavior is a cognitive prerequisite for successful joint action. We employed a musical joint action task to investigate how the brain achieves this distinction. Pianists performed the right-hand part of piano pieces, previously learned bimanually, while the complementary left-hand part either was not executed or was (believed to be) played by a co-performer. This experimental setting served to induce a co-representation of the left-hand part reflecting either the self or the co-performer. Single-pulse transcranial magnetic stimulation was applied to the right primary motor cortex and motor-evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from the resting left forearm. Results show that corticospinal excitability was modulated by whether the representation of the left hand was associated with the self or the other, with the MEP amplitude being low and high, respectively. This result remained unchanged in a separate session where participants could neither see nor hear the other but still infer his presence by means of contextual information. Furthermore, the amplitude of MEPs associated with co-performer presence increased with pianists' self-reported empathy. Thus, the sociality of the context modulates action attribution at the level of the motor control system.

Joint actions often require agents to track others' actions while planning and executing physically incongruent actions of their own. Previous research has indicated that this can lead to visuomotor interference when it occurs outside of joint action. How is such visuomotor interference avoided or overcome in joint actions? We hypothesized that when joint action partners represent their actions as interrelated components of a plan to bring about a joint action goal, each partner's movements need not be represented in relation to distinct, incongruent proximal goals. Instead they can be represented in relation to a single proximal goal -especially if the movements are, or appear to be, mechanically linked to a more distal joint action goal. To test this, we implemented a paradigm in which participants produced finger movements that were either congruent or incongruent with those of a virtual partner, and either with or without a joint action goal (the joint flipping of a switch, which turned on two light bulbs). Our findings indicate that visuomotor interference is reduced when two physically incongruent actions can be represented as mechanically interdependent contributions to a joint action goal.

Cognition, 2017

What enables individuals to act together? Recent discoveries suggest that a variety of mechanisms are involved. But something fundamental is yet to be investigated. In joint action, agents represent a collective goal, or so it is often assumed. But how, if at all, are collective goals represented in joint action and how do such representations impact performance? To investigate this question we adapted a bimanual paradigm, the circle-line drawing paradigm, to contrast two agents acting in parallel with two agents performing a joint action. Participants were required to draw lines or circles while observing circles or lines being drawn. The findings indicate that interpersonal motor coupling may occur in joint but not parallel action. This suggests that participants in joint actions can represent collective goals motorically.

PLOS ONE, 2012

Prediction of ''when'' a partner will act and ''what'' he is going to do is crucial in joint-action contexts. However, studies on face-to-face interactions in which two people have to mutually adjust their movements in time and space are lacking. Moreover, while studies on passive observation have shown that somato-motor simulative processes are disrupted when the observed actor is perceived as an out-group or unfair individual, the impact of interpersonal perception on joint-actions has never been directly addressed. Here we explored this issue by comparing the ability of pairs of participants who did or did not undergo an interpersonal perception manipulation procedure to synchronise their reach-to-grasp movements during: i) a guided interaction, requiring pure temporal reciprocal coordination, and ii) a free interaction, requiring both time and space adjustments. Behavioural results demonstrate that while in neutral situations free and guided interactions are equally challenging for participants, a negative interpersonal relationship improves performance in guided interactions at the expense of the free interactive ones. This was paralleled at the kinematic level by the absence of movement corrections and by low movement variability in these participants, indicating that partners cooperating within a negative interpersonal bond executed the cooperative task on their own, without reciprocally adapting to the partner's motor behaviour. Crucially, participants' performance in the free interaction improved in the manipulated group during the second experimental session while partners became interdependent as suggested by higher movement variability and by the appearance of interference between the self-executed actions and those observed in the partner. Our study expands current knowledge about on-line motor interactions by showing that visuo-motor interference effects, mutual motor adjustments and motorlearning mechanisms are influenced by social perception.

European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 2007

Motor Control, 2010

Psychological Science

Naturalistic joint action between two agents typically requires both motor coordination and strategic cooperation. However, these two fundamental processes have systematically been studied independently. We presented 50 dyads of adult participants with a novel collaborative task that combined different levels of motor noise with different levels of strategic noise, to determine whether the sense of agency (the experience of control over an action) reflects the interplay between these low-level (motor) and high-level (strategic) dimensions. We also examined how dominance in motor control could influence prosocial behaviors. We found that self-agency was particularly dependent on motor cues, whereas joint agency was particularly dependent on strategic cues. We suggest that the prime importance of strategic cues to joint agency reflects the co-representation of coagents’ interests during the task. Furthermore, we observed a reduction in prosocial strategies in agents who exerted domina...