2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103481
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Top-down social modulation of perception-action coupling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The same point can also be made for the broader literature on social modulation of automatic imitation. Indeed, although it has often been theorized (e.g., Stel et al, 2016; Wang & Hamilton, 2012), evidence for social modulation so far has been inconsistent (e.g., Carr et al, 2021; Cracco & Brass, 2019; Cracco et al, 2022; Cracco, Genschow, et al, 2018; Farmer et al, 2016; Genschow et al, 2022; Nevejans & Cracco, 2022; Ramsey, 2018; Souter et al, 2021; Wang et al, 2011). Based on our results, a possible reason for this pattern could be that the manipulations used in the literature differ in the extent to which they influence self-other similarity and that these differences explain part of the variability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The same point can also be made for the broader literature on social modulation of automatic imitation. Indeed, although it has often been theorized (e.g., Stel et al, 2016; Wang & Hamilton, 2012), evidence for social modulation so far has been inconsistent (e.g., Carr et al, 2021; Cracco & Brass, 2019; Cracco et al, 2022; Cracco, Genschow, et al, 2018; Farmer et al, 2016; Genschow et al, 2022; Nevejans & Cracco, 2022; Ramsey, 2018; Souter et al, 2021; Wang et al, 2011). Based on our results, a possible reason for this pattern could be that the manipulations used in the literature differ in the extent to which they influence self-other similarity and that these differences explain part of the variability.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Several studies showed that participants perceive point‐light agents as biological motion (Giese & Poggio, 2003; Grossman et al, 2000; Neri et al, 1998; Peuskens et al, 2005). However, our brains do not only process bottom‐up sensory information, but our perception and actions are influenced by our prior experience and might be modulated by social factors (Cracco et al, 2022). Our brain forms expectations and predicts mental states (Thornton et al, 2019), intentions (Kilner et al, 2007) and actions (Neri et al, 2006) of others.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, automatic imitation is reported to increase following the prior exposure to pro-social cues (e.g., friend), while it decreases following the presence of anti-social cues (e.g., alone) [ 22 , 23 ] (for similar findings, see [ 24 27 ]) (cf. [ 28 , 29 ]). This modulation is suggested to unfold courtesy of a separate, but interacting, neural network that is synonymous with social cognition, including the anterior medial frontal cortex (aFMC) and temporoparietal junction (TPJ) [ 30 33 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%