synchrony Flashcards

1
Q

define mimicry

A

spatially matched behaviour
after percieve a beh
- may not be consciously aware

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

define synchrony

A

spatially and temporally matched
can emerge spontaneously but eventually aware
requires anticipation of anothers behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what factors influence the emergence of synchrony

A
  1. spontaneous info exchange
    2 when we like the othr peron
  2. pro-self or pro-other orientation
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q
  1. spontaneous info exchange

oullier et al 2008

A

finger tapping
eyes open/closed
perfectly synchronise only when in eyes open condition
closed eyes no coord

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

relative phase

A

0 degrees freedom

perfect sycnh

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q
  1. when we like the other person

how might this impact synch?

A

preference for others may determine the degree to which we spontaneously fall in synch
physics not fully accountable for synchrony but mediates

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q
  1. when we like the other peron
    miles et al 2010
    aim/method
A

does liking affect spontaneous entrainment
high like - confed on time
low like - confed 10 mins late
pps walk on treadmill to white noise - confed in front
baseline no confed

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q
  1. when we like the other peron
    miles et al 2010
    results
A

ontime % entrainment sig increase than late or baseline

late still increase baseline - info exchange

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q
  1. pro-self vs pro-other orientation

how might this impact synch?

A

social value orientation thought to determine goals in interpersonal contexts

  • prosocial - max for both
  • individualist - max for self regrdless of other
  • competitive - max for self, relative to other
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    METHOD 1
A

female undergrad social value orientation determined via Q
arm curls to met 60s
silence 3m
- video of confed at met freq - no synch instructions

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    DV 1
A

coordination vs baseline

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    RESULTS 1
A

both coordinate at greater than chance level

prosocial sig > proself

natural avo influence propensity to synch

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    METHOD 2
A
instruct prosocial/self orientation 
points allocation game 
aim equal achievement with partner or maximise ownbenefit 
armcurls and vidlink 
- told play game after
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    RESULTS 2
A

both coord > chance

prosocial > inphase than proself

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q
  1. proself/proother orientation
    lumsden et al 2012
    explanations
A

proself more actively resistant to synchrony?
BUT how prosocial were they prior to manipuation?
BUT gender?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

why might liking and social orientation alter synchrony

A

differences in attentional allocation

synch may function svo - increase?

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

outcomes of synchrony

A
affective: 
liking and rapport
trust
prosocial beh
self esteem
cognitive: 
resource availability
recog memory
negative: 
conformity
obedience
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

outcomes of synchrony

liking and rapport

A

hove and risen 2009

vacherkulkdernsuk 2012

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

outcomes of synchrony

prosocial beh

A

valdesolo and destono 2011

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

outcomes of synchrony

self esteem

A

lumsden et al 2014

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

outcomes of synchrony

resource availability

A

honisch et al

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

outcomes of synchrony

recognition memory

A

miles et al

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

outcomes of synchrony

conformity

A

wiltermuth and heath 2012

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

outcomes of synchrony

obedience

A

wiltermuth 2012

25
vacherkulkdernsuk 2012 liking and rapport METHOD
does synchrony mediate the effect of self disclosure on embodied rapport interaction task videod over 20m score vid for simultaneous movement, tempo similarity, coord and smoothness
26
self disclosure
sharing peronal info thought to promote relations via liking and positive affect aarons paradigm - progressive self disclosure between dyad "how close do you feel to x"
27
embodied rapport
percieved shared motions, emotions and vitality with partner feelings of vitality and aliveness theories to stem from shared movements
28
vacherkulkdernsuk 2012 liking and rapport RESULTS
self disclosure sig predict rapport self disclosure sig predict synch synch sig predict rapport - direct effect of self disclosure on rapport is non sig when synchrony is a mediator self disclosing judged to move together more, thus predicting ^ pos, mutuality and vitality (emb. rapport) BEH SYNCHRONY DRIVES EMBODIED RAPPORT INDEPENDENT OF SELF OTHER OVERLAP - NOT BECAUSE BLUR BOUNDARIES - COORD 'ONENESS' INCREASES LIKING
29
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport aim
does synch increase affiliation with others?
30
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 1 - measuring synch METHOD
affiliation and objective synch vs subjective (self report) synch synch between pps and exp when tap finger (oullier) on drum pad - hear dv: mean synch and asynch
31
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 1- measuring synch RESULTS
degree of interpersonal synch predicts how much pp like the experimenter more synch = more liking BUT not causal - pps like before so synch more? - asynchrony just inhibit liking?
32
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 2 - manupulating synch METHOD
baseline likeability measure and synch/asynch/solo tapping
33
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 2 - manupulating synch RESULTS
no diff in likeability at baseline synch ^ liking of experimener **not mimicry - regardless of awareness - synchrony faciliatates liking, aysnch does NOT inhibit liking BUT - liking ^ because of interpersonal synch or because experiencing synch?
34
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 3. Inanimate synch METHOD
does synch increase liking because of its interpersonal nature? tap to metronome when exp present or in time with exp
35
hove and risen 2009 liking and rapport 3. Inanimate synch RESULTS
inanimate tapping doesnt change likeability linked to interpersonal connection - driven specifically by interpersonal synchrony
36
why might synchrony increase liking?
1. neural activation - temporal and spatial overlap bteween self and other blur ability to discriminate 2. pos perceptions of self may extend to others 3. synch assoc with communal relations - infer closeness when notice synch as cues of a shared relationship
37
valdesolo and desteno 2011 prosocial behaviour - altruism METHOD
synch theorised to induce compassion for others pps synch/asynch w/victim tap synch task with confed while listen to beats confed synch/asynch to pps Qs on similarity and liking of partner then told confed had long task - help or leave measure how long help for
38
valdesolo and desteno 2011 prosocial behaviour - altruism RESULTS
synch ^ percieved similarity with victim compassion ^ in synch condition synch ^ chose to help and for sig longer time synch sig ^ percieved similarity - similarity mediate link between synch and compassino compassion directly predict altruism - not mediated by synch induced liking but similarity/self-otheroverlap
39
miles et al 2012 recognition aim
natur of synch is likely to have a sig impact on social cog does interpersonal coord influence the processing of self relevant info - is the magnitude of self memory mediated by synch stability
40
self reference effect
preferential encoding and memory related info related to self>others self memory effect attenuated when social connection with others
41
miles et al 2012 recognition METHOD
dual task alternation of word repetition between self and confed via headphones arm curl - confed inphase/antiphase suprise mem test for words said by self, other or not said
42
miles et al 2012 recognition RESULTS
antiphase self mem advantage eliminate when inphase synch eliminate self reference - measure with arons?
43
honisch et al 2016 resource availability - perceptual motor fluency hypothesis
1. synch should increase motor fluency -less attention directed at co actor as movement predictable based on oneself - control relied on forward motor models where current movement predicts motor output - predicted and actual proprioceptive feedback paired with visual input of coactor -extent match = integration of proprioceptive cues 2. synch promote perceptual fluency of coactor and motor of own beh - enhanced ability to process alt aspects of the environ/divert attention - fluency drive increase in pos eval
44
define entrainment
pull towards movement of others - spontaneously | unconsiously match even when set at diff tempos
45
resource availability hyp
visual and auditory inputs of self and other movement the more self and other are temporally, spatially and topologically matched, the more sensory signals are likely to be integrated process self and other as one
46
honisch et al 2016 resource availability - perceptual motor fluency METHOD
sych/asych/baseline synch movement to met - bouncing 1. watch task partner on screen in front who bounce in or out of synch 2. report p's/g's in periphery whilst maintain fix on partner - probe detection
47
honisch et al 2016 resource availability - perceptual motor fluency RESULTS
interbalance interval - time diff for each target relative to preceding target event - motor fluency = decreased variability in IBI pre - IBI in synch and asynch not sig differ, but sig higher valiability in asynch - make more errors when percieve asynch with probe: Significantly more errors in asycnc compared to sych Much more cog resources available - driven by percieved fluency motor fluency mediate synch and interpersonal rapport synch not = interpersonal rapport
48
prob with mediation analsis
approach should be cautious essentially correlational could have 3rd variable or be reverse
49
honisch et al 2016 resource availability - perceptual motor fluency explanation
synch report drawn more to actor than non moving baseline despite greater probe detection why? - not because less reported attention - partner in synch fosters ideology that sharing - beh outsourcing encourages perception that task less challenging and have more resources
50
possible neg outcomes of synch
conformity | obedience
51
wiltermuth 2012 conformity
synch action increase likelihood that comply with requests of task partner even if agg more likely to agree to give noise blast to next group even though aversive increse compliance with in group
52
wiltermuth 2011 obedience
walk in step with authority fig increases likelihood that willing to kill sowbugs at leaders request
53
bensimon and bodner 2011 | agg
synch chanting prior football game increase agg levels than those who dont chat in group vs outgroup
54
possible mechanisms underlin socil cog benefits of synch
mooring effect - mrsh et al 2009 attentional union - macre et al 2008 reduced cog demands - shockley and tuvey 2006
55
wheatley et al 2012 | mech underlying social cog
mental connection feels "effortless" humans are cog misers - try to conseerve energy by relying on heuristics and stereotypes synch supports efficient communication btween brain regions
56
rizzolatti 1980 | mirror neuron system
when monkeys percieve other ctions - sme motor are activates | when copy - activtion heightened
57
mechanism of synch self other overlap paladino 2010
brush cheek of participants while watched a stranger in video brushed in synch or asynch also more self other merging of body sensations and face sensations more overlap on IOS to synch stranger - perception of closeness and conformity behaviour self projection in inference task and anchoring in the other in the conformity task (give estimate of A's with strangers estimates present)
58
describe self other overlap
experiencing blurred boundaries of body representations may also blur boundaries of conceptual representations - representation overlapping with that of another person could lead to conceptual rep (ie traits and states) of self and other as merging