Body synchronization between interacting people involves coordinative movements in time, space and form. The introduction of newer technologies for automated video analysis and motion tracking has considerably improved the accurate measurement of coordination, particularly in temporal and spatial terms. However, the form of interpersonal coordination has been less explored. In the present study we address this gap by exploring the effect of trust on temporal and morphological patterns of interpersonal coordination. We adapted an optical motion-capture system to record spontaneous body movements in pairs of individuals engaged in natural conversations. We conducted two experiments in which we manipulated trust through a breach of expectancy (Study 1: 10 trustful and 10 distrustful participants) and friendship (Study 2: 20 dyads of friends and 20 dyads of strangers). In Study 1, results show the participants' strong, early mirror-like coordination in response to the confederates' breach of trust. In Study 2, imitative coordination tended to be more pronounced in pairs of friends than in pairs of non-friends. Overall, our results show not only that listeners move in reaction to speakers, but also that speakers react to listeners with a chain of dynamic coordination patterns affected by the immediate disposition of, and long-term relationship with, their interlocutors.

No abstract

In the present article the general guidelines for a cultural psychology of science are proposed and discussed. In order to do so, the first section of this article presents a literature review of philosophical, sociological, and psychological studies of science during the 20th century. Through this review, it becomes clear that the existing studies of science have either neglected the personal role of the scientist, or subsumed it under collective elements, or reduced it to cognitive styles and personality traits. To overcome this shortcoming, the cultural psychology of science proposes to understand the scientist as a purpose-oriented person that constructively transforms culturally available meanings in order to create novel scientific knowledge. This new theoretical synthesis is presented and exemplified through four aspects that define the personal dimension of science. In sum, this work looks to emphasize the crucial, driving role of the person of the scientists for the creation of novel scientific knowledge.

Both Robert Innis’s and Svend Brinkmann’s works bring to the fore a notorious, but usually forgotten, topic on cultural psychology: the normative framework that regulates the relation between the researcher and the phenomena studied. In fact, these ‘models of human flourishing’, using authors’ terminology, are scarcely discussed in comparison to theoretical, methodological, and empirical issues. In the present paper, a number of potential reasons for this omission are explored. In particular, it is argued that discussing the normative and pragmatic side of the discipline appears as risky in two directions: turning cultural psychology into activism, and conducting value-laden research. For this purpose, the case of Arthur Jensen's 1969 controversial publication on IQ is discussed. This example is useful to reveal the challenges that cultural psychology must face in order to become more aware of its normative orientations; particularly the pragmatic, social impact associated to conduct research on human issues. Ultimately, it is shown that the apparent risks mentioned before emerge from implicit, outdated conceptions of both activism and scientific activity.

No abstract