ArticleScientific reports2020
Synchronicities that shape the perception of joint action.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Active Inference Modeling of Socially Shared Cognition in Virtual Reality.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Analyzing gaze and hand movement patterns in leader-follower interactions during a time-continuous cooperative manipulation task.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Evaluations of dyadic synchrony: observers' traits influence estimation and enjoyment of synchrony in mirror-game movements.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Playing the mirror game in virtual reality with an autonomous character.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- There is chemistry in social chemistry.Science advances · 2022Article
- Liking as a balance between synchronization, complexity and novelty.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Coordination dynamics of multi-agent interaction in a musical ensemble.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Multilevel rhythms in multimodal communication.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2021Review
- Intentional synchronisation affects automatic imitation and source memory.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In joint performances spanning from jazz improvisation to soccer, expert performers synchronize their movements in ways that novices cannot. Particularly, experts can align the velocity profiles of their movements in order to achieve synchrony on a fine-grained time scale, compared to novices who can only synchronize the duration of their movement intervals. This study investigated how experts' ability to engage in velocity-based synchrony affects observers' perception of coordination and their aesthetic experience of joint performances. Participants observed two moving dots on a screen and were told that these reflect the hand movements of two performers engaging in joint improvisation. The dots were animated to reflect the velocity-based synchrony characteristic of expert performance (in terms of jitter of the velocity profile: Experiment 1, or through aligning sharpness of the velocity profile: Experiment 2) or contained only interval-based synchrony. Performances containing velocity-based synchrony were judged as more coordinated with performers rated as liking each other more, and were rated as more beautiful, providing observers with a stronger aesthetic experience. These findings demonstrate that subtle timing cues fundamentally shape the experience of watching joint actions, directly influencing how beautiful and enjoyable we find these interactions, as well as our perception of the relationship between co-actors.
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.