Advertisement

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

, Volume 30, Issue 3, pp 97–113 | Cite as

Implicit Behavioral Mimicry: Investigating the Impact of Group Membership

  • Yanelia Yabar
  • Lucy Johnston
  • Lynden Miles
  • Victoria Peace
ORIGINAL PAPER

Abstract

Two experiments investigated the impact of group membership on non-conscious behavioral mimicry. Female participants viewed videotapes of female confederates who rubbed their faces whilst describing a picture. The extent to which the participant mimicked this face rubbing behavior was assessed from video footage taken using a hidden video-camera. Experiment 1 showed greater mimicry of a member of an in-group than of a member of an out-group. Experiment 2 showed both explicit and implicit liking of a target group to predict the extent of mimicry of a member of that group. There was a positive relationship between implicit liking and mimicry but a negative relationship between explicit liking and mimicry. Results are discussed in terms of processes underlying mimicry.

Keywords

Inter-group behavior Mimicry 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Sarah Austin and Gemma Young for acting as confederates, Sanna Malinen, Katherine Stevenson and Steven Gaukrodger for their assistance in the data collection, coding and analysis, and Brenda Major and Jim Blascovich for comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. This research was supported by grants U2043 and D3336 from the University of Canterbury. Dr. Yabar is now at the Open Polytechnic of New Zealand.

References

  1. Abelson, R. P., Kinder, D. R., Peters, M. D., & Fiske, S. T. (1982). Affective and semantic components in political person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 619–630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497–529.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N., Lemery, C. R., & Mullett, J. (1988). Form and function in motor mimicry: Topographic evidence that the primary function is communicative. Human Communication Research, 14, 275–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Lemery, C. R., & Mullett, J. (1987). Motor mimicry as primitive empathy. In N. Eisenberg, & J. Strayer (Eds.), Empathy and its development (pp. 317–338). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Berger, S. M, & Hadley, S. W. (1975). Some effects of a model’s performance on an observer’s electromyographic activity. American Journal of Psychology, 2, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bernieri, F. J. (1988). Coordinated movement and rapport in teacher–students interactions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 12, 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bernieri, F. J., Davis, J., Rosenthal, R., & Knee, C. (1994). Interactional synchrony and rapport: Measuring synchrony in displays devoid of sound and facial affect. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 303–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bernieri, F., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). Interpersonal coordination: Behavior matching and interactional synchrony. In R. S. Feldman, & B. Rime (Eds.), Fundamentals of nonverbal communication (pp. 401–432). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Blairy, S., Herrera, P., & Hess, U. (1999). Mimicry and the judgment of emotional facial expressions. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 23, 5–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., Lickel, B., & Kowai-Bell, N. (2001). Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 253–267.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Buss D. M., & Kendrick, D. T. (1998). Evolutionary social psychology. In D. T. Gilbert, & S. T. Fiske et al (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology Vol. 2 (4th edn. pp. 982–1026). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  13. Caporael, L. R. (1997). The evolution of truly social cognition: The core configuration model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 276–298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Caporael, L. R. (2001). Evolutionary psychology: Toward a unifying theory and a hybrid science. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 607–628.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cappella, J. N. & Panalp, S. (1981). Talk and silence sequences in informal conversations: Interspeaker influence. Human Communication Research, 7, 117–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception–behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Chartrand T. L., Cheng C. M., & Jefferis V. E. (2002). You’re just a chameleon: The automatic nature and social significance of mimicry. In M. Jarymowicz, R. K. Ohme (Eds.) Natura auotmatymow (Nature of Automaticity, pp. 19–23). Warazawa: IPPAN & SWPS.Google Scholar
  18. Chartrand, T. L. & Jefferis, V. (2003). Consequences of automatic goal pursuit and the case of nonconscious mimicry. In J. P. Forgas, K. D. Williams & W. von Hippel (Eds.), Responding to the social world: Implicit and explicit processes in social judgments and decisions (pp. 290–305). Philadelphia: Psychological Press.Google Scholar
  19. Chartrand, T. L., Maddux, W., & Lakin, J. (2005). Beyond the perception–behavior link: The ubiquitous utility and motivational moderators of non-conscious mimicry. In R. Hassin, J. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought II: The new unconscious (pp. 334–361). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Cheng, C. M., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). Self-monitoring without awareness: Using mimicry as a non-conscious affiliation strategy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 1170–1179.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Condon, W. S., & Sander, L. W. (1974). Neonate movement is synchronized with adult speech: Interactional participation and language acquisition. Science, 183, 99–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In J. Barkow, L. Cosmides, & J. Tooby (Eds.) The adapted mind (pp. 163–228). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Dasgupta, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2001). On the malleability of automatic attitudes: Combating automatic prejudice with images of admired and disliked individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 800–814.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dimberg, U. (1988). Facial electromyography and the experience of emotion. Journal of Psychophysiology, 2, 277–282.Google Scholar
  25. Dimberg, U., Thunberg, M., & Elmehed, K. (2000). Unconscious facial reactions to emotional facial expressions. Psychological Science, 11, 86–89.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Dovidio, J. F., Kawakami, K., Johnson, C., Johnson, B., & Howard, A. (1997). On the nature of prejudice: Automatic and controlled processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 510–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Dunlap, W. P., Cortina, J. M., Vaslow, J. B., & Burke, M. J. (1996). Meta-analysis of experiments with matched groups or repeated measures designs. Psychological Methods, 1, 170–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Fazio, R. H., Jackson, J. R., Dunton, B. C., & Williams, C. J. (1995). Variability in automatic activation as an unobtrusive measure of racial attitudes: A bona fide pipeline?. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 1013–1027.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Giles, H., & Powesland, P. F. (1975). Speech style and social evaluation. London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Giles, H., & Smith, P. M. (1979). Accommodation theory: Optimal levels of convergence. In H. Giles, & R. St Clair (Eds.), Language and social psychology (pp. 45–65). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  31. Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: Attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological Review, 102, 4–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwarz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1464–1480.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gump, B., & Kulik, J. A. (1997). Stress, affiliation, and emotional contagion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 305–319.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Harvie, K., Marshall-McCaskey, J., & Johnston, L. (1998). Sex-based biases in occupational hiring decisions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1700–1713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hatfield, E., Cacioppo, J., & Rapson, R. L. (1994). Emotional contagion. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Johnson, D., & Edgar, B. (1996). From lucy to language. New York: Simon & Schuster Editions.Google Scholar
  38. Johnston, L. (2002). Behavioral mimicry and stigmatization. Social Cognition, 20, 18–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Johnston, L., Bristow, M., & Love, N. (2000). An investigation of the link between attributional judgments and stereotype-based judgments. European Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 551–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Johnston, L., Locke, V., Giles, L., & Rattray, K. (1997). Stereotypes: The good, the bad and the ugly. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 27, 725–741.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Karpinski, A., & Hilton, J. L. (2001). Attitudes and the Implicit Association Test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 774–788.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Kendon, A. (1970). Movement coordination in social interaction. Acta Psychologica, 32, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. LaFrance, M. (1979). Nonverbal synchrony and rapport: Analysis by the cross-lag panel technique. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42, 66–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. LaFrance, M. (1982). Posture mirroring and rapport. In M. Davis (Ed.), Interaction rhythms: Periodicity in communicative behavior (pp. 279–298). New York: Human Sciences Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  45. LaFrance, M., & Ickes, W. (1981). Posture mirroring and interactional involvement: Sex and sex typing effects. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 5, 139–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lakin, J. L., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003) Using non-conscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science, 14, 334–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lakin, J. L., Jefferis, V. E., Cheng, C. M., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). The Chameleon effect as social glue: Evidence for the evolutionary significance of non-conscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27, 145–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lewin, K. (1943). Defining the “field at a given time”. Psychological Review, 50, 292–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Lott, B. E., & Lott, A. J. (1961). The formation of positive attitudes toward group members. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 61, 297–300.Google Scholar
  50. Macrae, C. N., Bodenhausen, G. V., Milne, A. B., & Jetten, J. (1994). Out of mind but back in sight: Stereotypes on the rebound. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 808–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. McConnell, A. R., & Liebold, J. M. (2001). Relations between the Implicit Association Test, explicit racial attitudes, and discriminatory behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 435–442.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Meltzoff, A., & Moore, M. K. (1977). Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science, 198 75–78.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Monteith, M. J., Spicer, C. V., & Tooman, G. D. (1998). Consequences of stereotype suppression: Stereotypes on and not on the rebound. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 355–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Neuberg, S. L., Smith, D. M., Hoffman, J. C., & Russell, F. J. (1994). When we observe stigmatized and “normal” individuals interacting: Stigma by association. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 20, 196–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Poirier, F., & McKee, J. (1999). Understanding human evolution 4th edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  56. Rudman, L. A., Ashmore, R. D., & Gary, M. L. (2001). “Unlearning” automatic biases: The malleability of implicit prejudice and stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 856–868.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Stel, M., Blascovich, J., McGall, C., & Vonk, R. (2005). When mimicry makes it worse. Paper presented at the European Association for Experimental Social Psychology 14th General Meeting, Würzburg.Google Scholar
  58. van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Kawakami, K., & van Knippenberg, A. (2003a). Mimicry and pro-social behavior. Psychological Science, 15, 71–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Steenaert, B., van Knippenberg, A. (2003b). Mimicry for money: Behavioral consequences of imitation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 393–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. van Baaren, R. B., Horgan, T. G, Chartrand, T. L., Dijkmans, M., & Horgan, T. G. (2004). The forest, the trees, and the chameleon: Context dependence and mimicry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 453–459.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vaughan, K. B., & Lanzetta, J. T. (1981). The effect of modification of expressive displays on vicarious emotional arousal. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 17, 16–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Walton, P. R. (2003). Implicit Associations Measurement Software (Version 1.0) [Computer software]. Christchruch, New Zealand: Dexterware.Google Scholar
  63. Webb, J. T. (1969). Subject speech rates as a function of interviewer behaviour. Language and Speech, 12, 54–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Webb, J. T. (1973). Interview synchrony: An investigation of two speech rate measures in an automated standardized interview. In B. Pope, & A. W., Siegman (Eds.), Studies in dyadic communication (pp. 115–133). New York: Pergamon.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yanelia Yabar
    • 1
  • Lucy Johnston
    • 1
  • Lynden Miles
    • 1
  • Victoria Peace
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  2. 2.University of BathBathUK

Personalised recommendations