2016
DOI: 10.3389/fncom.2016.00088
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Minimalist Social-Affective Value for Use in Joint Action: A Neural-Computational Hypothesis

Abstract: Joint Action is typically described as social interaction that requires coordination among two or more co-actors in order to achieve a common goal. In this article, we put forward a hypothesis for the existence of a neural-computational mechanism of affective valuation that may be critically exploited in Joint Action. Such a mechanism would serve to facilitate coordination between co-actors permitting a reduction of required information. Our hypothesized affective mechanism provides a value function based impl… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As far as motor resonance is concerned, a subject of discussion is whether, in some contexts, mirroring the observed action can be disadvantageous, as when we have to perform a joint action. Both physical and social cues affording non-identical complementary actions have been identified (Sartori et al., 2012; Scorolli et al., 2014, 2018; Sacheli et al., 2015; Vesper et al., 2017), but little is yet known about actions and contexts affectively connoted (Bastiaansen et al., 2009; Kuhbandner et al., 2010; Costantini and Ferri, 2013; Lowe et al., 2016; on group membership, see Iani et al., 2011; on motivations for joint actions, see Godman, 2013). Through a specific re-framing or re-adaptation of psychodramatic method, these challenging issues seem feasible to be tackled.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As far as motor resonance is concerned, a subject of discussion is whether, in some contexts, mirroring the observed action can be disadvantageous, as when we have to perform a joint action. Both physical and social cues affording non-identical complementary actions have been identified (Sartori et al., 2012; Scorolli et al., 2014, 2018; Sacheli et al., 2015; Vesper et al., 2017), but little is yet known about actions and contexts affectively connoted (Bastiaansen et al., 2009; Kuhbandner et al., 2010; Costantini and Ferri, 2013; Lowe et al., 2016; on group membership, see Iani et al., 2011; on motivations for joint actions, see Godman, 2013). Through a specific re-framing or re-adaptation of psychodramatic method, these challenging issues seem feasible to be tackled.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(For the theory underlying the design, see Lowe et al. [3] and for interpretation of the data, see Rittmo et al. [4] .)…”
Section: Experimental Design Materials and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…appear as though they are semantically constituted. In humans, associative learning based models have been used to explain data from hitherto explored animal learning based paradigms (Delameter et al 2012(Delameter et al , 2017Lowe et al 2016. However, humans may variably use associative, but alternatively, other cognitive strategies in order to complete such tasks.…”
Section: Computational Modelling Approaches To Associative Learning Amentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The Affective Associative Two-Process model that we developed Lowe et al 2016; merges Associative Mediational Theory (Overmier & Laury 1979;Kruse & Overmier 1982) and Associative Two-Process theory (Trapold 1970;Trapold & Overmier 1982). It does so by modelling the differential expectancies of ATP ("E") in terms of differential reinforcement outcomes.…”
Section: Affective-associative Two-process Modellingmentioning
confidence: 99%