ArticlePsychological research2024
How a co-actor's (Un-) reliability modulates goal selection in a novel joint goal-setting paradigm.
Article in Psychological research, 2024. 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.
- On dueling multi-act arithmetic: exploring the dynamics of goal-driven competition on engagement and cognition.Experimental brain research · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sociomotor theory - an extension of ideomotor theory - suggests that actions can also be represented in terms of the effects they elicit from others. But what if those others violate one's action effect anticipations? Here, we introduce a novel joint goal-setting paradigm to investigate effects of co-actors' occasional and overall unreliability on an individual's goal selection. In a first step, the participant moved a target halfway from the bottom center to the top left or right corner of the computer screen. In the second step, the co-actor moved the target to its final left or right position. In a learning block, the co-actor always continued the participant's target movements. In the test block(s), the co-actor produced congruent action effects in 50% (unreliable) vs. 80% (reliable co-actor) of the trials. Experiment 1 consisted of one (between-participants), Experiment 2 and 3 of two (within-participants) test blocks; in Experiment 3, the co-actor changed between blocks. Results of Experiments 1 and 3 reveal that participants repeated their corner choice more often after incongruent trials, but only when the co-actor was generally reliable. Implications in terms of sociomotor action control and joint action are discussed.
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.