Mimicry and Prosocial Behavior

Baaren, Rick B. van; Holland, Rob W.; Kawakami, Kerry; Knippenberg, Ad van

doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01501012.x

Cited by 593 publications

(446 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

411

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous work has demonstrated that slightly asynchronous actions in capuchin monkeys can facilitate behavior similarity in a way that is equivalent to simultaneous action, a phenomenon known as isomorphic coordination (46). Capuchin monkeys are more affiliative and willing to interact with humans who have recently mimicked their actions (47), and mimicry increases prosocial behavior, affiliation, and a feeling of interconnectedness in humans (48)(49)(50). Mimicry, behavioral coordination, and synchronization may facilitate positive emotions and bonding, inducing state-matching between individuals, such as in emotional contagion (16).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden

Suchak

Waal

2012

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The debate about the origins of human prosociality has focused on the presence or absence of similar tendencies in other species, and, recently, attention has turned to the underlying mechanisms. We investigated whether direct reciprocity could promote prosocial behavior in brown capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella). Twelve capuchins tested in pairs could choose between two tokens, with one being "prosocial" in that it rewarded both individuals (i.e., 1/1), and the other being "selfish" in that it rewarded the chooser only (i.e., 1/0). Each monkey's choices with a familiar partner from their own group was compared with choices when paired with a partner from a different group. Capuchins were spontaneously prosocial, selecting the prosocial option at the same rate regardless of whether they were paired with an in-group or out-group partner. This indicates that interaction outside of the experimental setting played no role. When the paradigm was changed, such that both partners alternated making choices, prosocial preference significantly increased, leading to mutualistic payoffs. As no contingency could be detected between an individual's choice and their partner's previous choice, and choices occurred in rapid succession, reciprocity seemed of a relatively vague nature akin to mutualism. Having the partner receive a better reward than the chooser (i.e., 1/2) during the alternating condition increased the payoffs of mutual prosociality, and prosocial choice increased accordingly. The outcome of several controls made it hard to explain these results on the basis of reward distribution or learned preferences, and rather suggested that joint action promotes prosociality, resulting in so-called attitudinal reciprocity.cooperation | tit-for-tat | inequity | mirroring

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden

Suchak

Waal

2012

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…People may even be more inclined to vote for prosocial left-wing political parties following mimicry (Stel & Harinck, 2011). Taken together, these findings suggest that mimicry elicits prosocial responses which extend beyond the mimicry interaction (Van Baaren & Chartrand, 2005;van Baaren et al, 2004).Mimicry also appears to influence or affect the self-construal of the person being mimicked. When completing a 'twenty statements' measure of self-construal (Kuhn & McPartland, 1954), in which people may define themselves by relationships with other people (interdependently) or without reference to others (independently), people reliably provide more interdependent statements following mimicry (Redeker, Stel, & Mastop, 2011;Stel & Harinck, 2011;.…”

mentioning

confidence: 89%

Cognitive mechanisms for responding to mimicry from others

Hale

Hamilton

2016

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

unclear how the complex behavioural effects of mimicry relate to neural systems which respond to being mimicked. Mimicry activates regions associated with mirror properties, selfother processing and reward. In this review, we outline three potential models linking these regions with cognitive consequences of being mimicked. The models suggest that positive downstream consequences of mimicry may depend upon self-other overlap, detection of contingency or low prediction error. Finally, we highlight limitations with traditional research designs and suggest alternative methods for achieving highly ecological validity and experimental control. We also highlight unanswered questions which may guide future research. Keywords: mimicry, imitation, nonverbal behaviour, neurocognitive modelsIt is often said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and copying what other people do is a central feature of human social interaction (Frith & Frith, 2012; Hamilton, 2014; Meltzoff, 2010; Over & Carpenter, 2013). One way we copy others is through unconscious behavioural mimicry, also described as 'behaviour matching' (Bernieri & Rosenthal, 1991;Chartrand & Bargh, 1999) or the 'chameleon effect' (Chartrand & Bargh, 1999). This kind of mimicry occurs when one person unintentionally and effortlessly copies another person's posture or body movements without either one being aware (Chartrand & Lakin, 2013;Chartrand & van Baaren, 2009). Mimicry may extend to the contagion of facial expressions (Bavelas, Black, Lemery, & Mullett, 1986, 1987 Dimberg, Thunberg, & Elmehed, 2000;Hsee, Hatfield, Carlson, & Chemtob, 1990), moods (Hsee et al., 1990;Neumann & Strack, 2000) and speech (Giles & Powesland, 1975;Neumann & Strack, 2000).As well as mimicry, there are many other ways we coordinate our behaviour with other people during social interactions (Table 1). The umbrella term 'interpersonal coordination' covers a range of coordinated actions between two people, which can be linked in both space and time. Actions occurring at the same time are described as entrained or synchronous; this includes perfect synchrony where actions are matched in form and timing, as well as general synchrony where different actions are coordinated in time (see Table 1, column 1). Actions that occur after a delay but which are contingent on the other are termed imitation or mimicry if the form is the same, and complementary if the form is different (see column 2). There is a distinction between imitation, which is deliberate and goal-directed,and mimicry, which is unconscious and spontaneous. In this paper we will focus specifically on mimicry. For the main part we will limit our review to mimicry of postures and body movements, and we will not include literature on facial, emotional or vocal mimicry. We will also concentrate on adult mimicry rather than developmental literature. At the end, we will return to consider how future research may situate mimicry within a wider framework of interpersonal coordination. Whilst partners in real life social interac...

show abstract

“…The literature has identified situational (e.g., a goal to affiliate; , individual (e.g., a pro-social orientation; van Baaren et al 2003), and relational (e.g., group membership; Yabar et al 2006) variables that increase behavioral mimicry, and has shown that mimicry generally has positive consequences. For example, after mimicking somebody, individuals report higher liking of this person (Chartrand and Bargh 1999; and behave in a more pro-social fashion toward them and others (van Baaren et al 2004).…”

Section: Behavioral and Linguistic Mimicrymentioning

confidence: 99%

She Said, She Said: Differential Interpersonal Similarities Predict Unique Linguistic Mimicry in Online Word of Mouth

Moore¹,

McFerran²

2017

Journal of the Association for Consumer Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

3This research examines the antecedents, causes, and consequences of linguistic mimicry, which assesses how closely individuals match others' word use, in online WOM. We examine mimicry of both linguistic style (how things are said) and content (what is said). To our knowledge, this research provides the first demonstration of unique linguistic mimicry, where consumers engaging in online WOM differentially mimic other posters' word use. Two experiments and one study using field data show that when consumers are personally similar to an individual who has previously posted (e.g., same gender), they mimic this individual's positive emotion and social word use. When consumers are similar in status to an individual who has previously posted (e.g., same forum ranking), they mimic this individual's cognitive and descriptive word use. This differential mimicry is driven by affiliation versus achievement goals, respectively, and affects consumers' engagement in online WOM in terms of posting incidence and volume.

show abstract

Mimicry and Prosocial Behavior

Cited by 593 publications

References 15 publications

Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden

Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden

Cognitive mechanisms for responding to mimicry from others

She Said, She Said: Differential Interpersonal Similarities Predict Unique Linguistic Mimicry in Online Word of Mouth

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About