ArticleCognition2018
Co-actors represent the order of each other's actions.
Article in Cognition, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed.
- Distinct neural dynamics in joint versus side-by-side actions: insights from dual EEG.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2025Article
- Interbrain neural correlates of self and other integration in joint statistical learning.NPJ science of learning · 2024Article
- Unveiling the invisible: receivers use object weight cues for grip force planning in handover actions.Experimental brain research · 2024Article
- Interpersonal prior information informs ensemble coding through the co-representation process.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- Searching for the Metaverse: Neuroscience of Physical and Digital Communities.Cyberpsychology, behavior and social networking · 2024Article
- Article
- Sequential aiming in pairs: the multiple levels of joint action.Experimental brain research · 2021Article
- Crossmodal correspondences as common ground for joint action.Acta psychologica · 2021Article
- The influence of prior intention on joint action: an fNIRS-based hyperscanning study.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2020Article
- An approach to social flexibility: Congruency effects during spontaneous word-by-word interaction.PloS one · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research has shown that people represent each other's tasks and actions when acting together. However, less is known about how co-actors represent each other's action sequences. Here, we asked whether co-actors represent the order of each other's actions within an action sequence, or whether they merely represent the intended end state of a joint action together with their own contribution. In the present study, two co-actors concurrently performed action sequences composed of two actions. We predicted that if co-actors represent the order of each other's actions, they should experience interference when the order of their actions differs. Supporting this prediction, the results of six experiments consistently showed that co-actors moved more slowly when performing the same actions in a different order compared to performing the same actions in the same order. In line with findings from bimanual movement tasks, our results indicate that interference can arise due to differences in movement parameters and due to differences in the perceptual characteristics of movement goals. The present findings extend previous research on co-representation, providing evidence that people represent not only the elements of another's task, but also their temporal structure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.