Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation
- 229 Downloads
Actions of others automatically prime similar responses in an agent’s behavioural repertoire. As a consequence, perceived or anticipated imitation facilitates own action control and, at the same time, imitation boosts social affiliation and rapport with others. It has previously been suggested that basic mechanisms of associative learning can account for behavioural effects of imitation, whereas a possible role of associative learning for affiliative processes is poorly understood at present. Therefore, this study examined whether contingency and contiguity, the principles of associative learning, affect also the social effects of imitation. Two experiments yielded evidence in favour of this hypothesis by showing more social affiliation in conditions with high contingency (as compared to low contingency) and in conditions of high contiguity (compared to low contiguity).
We would like to thank Gregory Born for creating the video clip set. The work of RP was supported by a grant from the German Research Council (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft; DFG; grant number PF 853/2 − 1).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All author declare that no conflict of interest exists.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Adank, P., Stewart, A.J., Connell, L., & Wood, J. (2013). Accent imitation positively affects language attitudes. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 280.Google Scholar
- Aron, A., & Aron, E. N. (1986). Love and the expansion of self: Understanding attraction and satisfaction. Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
- Catmur, C. (2017). Automatic imitation? Imitative compatibility affects responses at high perceptual load. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance (in press).Google Scholar
- Cook, J. L., & Bird, G. (2012). Atypical social modulation of imitation in autism spectrum conditions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 42(6), 1045–10511Google Scholar
- Dignath, D., Pfister, R., Eder, A.B., Kiesel, A., & Kunde, W. (2014). Representing the hyphen in action–effect associations: automatic acquisition and bidirectional retrieval of action–effect intervals. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition 40(6), 1701–1712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Hasler, B. S., Hirschberger, G., Shani-Sherman, T., & Friedman, D. A. (2014). Virtual peacemakers: Mimicry increases empathy in simulated contact with virtual outgroup members. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 17(12), 766–771.Google Scholar
- Heyes, C. (2011). Automatic imitation. Psychological Bulletin, 137(3), 463.Google Scholar
- Heyes, C. (2012). Imitation: associative and context Dependent. In W. Prinz, M. Beisert, A. Herwig (Eds.), Tutorials in action science. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Rescorla, R.A., & Wagner, A.R. (1972). A theory of Pavlovian conditioning: Variations in the effectiveness of reinforcement and nonreinforcement. In A. H. Black & W. F. Prokasy (Eds.), Classical conditioning II (pp. 64–99). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.Google Scholar
- Wang, Y., & Hamilton, A.F. (2012). Social top-down response modulation (STORM): a model of the control of mimicry in social interaction. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6(153).Google Scholar