ArticlePloS one2022
Reaction time coupling in a joint stimulus-response task: A matter of functional actions or likable agents?
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Is Mental Effort Exertion Contagious? A Replication Study.Journal of cognition · 2025Article
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
Shaping one owns actions by observing others' actions is driven by the deep-rooted mechanism of perception-action coupling. It typically occurs automatically, expressed as for example the unintentional synchronization of reaction times in interactive games. Theories on perception-action coupling highlight its benefits such as the joint coordination of actions to cooperatively perform tasks properly, the learning of novel actions from others, and the bonding with likable others. However, such functional aspects and how they shape perception-action coupling have never been compared quantitatively. Here we tested a total of hundred-fifteen participants that played a stimulus-response task while, in parallel, they observed videos of agents that played the exact same task several milliseconds in advance. We compared to what degree the reaction times of actions of agents, who varied their behavior in terms of functionality and likability in preceding prisoner dilemma games and quizzes, shape the reaction times of human test participants. To manipulate functionality and likability, we varied the predictability of cooperative behavior and correctness of actions of agents, respectively, resulting in likable (cooperative), dislikable (uncooperative), functional (correct actions), and dysfunctional (incorrect actions) agents. The results of three experiments showed that the participants' reaction times correlated most with the reaction times of agents that expressed functional behavior. However, the likability of agents had no effects on reaction time correlations. These findings suggest that, at least in the current computer task, participants are more likely to adopt the timing of actions from people that perform correct actions than from people that they like.
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.