Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Meta-Analyses of the Intra- and Interpersonal Outcomes of Interpersonal Coordination

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Interpersonal coordination, the extent to which social partners coordinate each other’s postures and mannerisms, acts as a “social glue” that serves both individual and social goals, such as producing prosocial behaviors and facilitating harmonious interactions. Research in this area has become prominent in a variety of domains both within and outside of psychology, forming a sizeable literature dedicated to investigating the causes and consequences of interpersonal coordination. We conducted a series of meta-analyses on studies that treated interpersonal coordination as an independent variable, in order to measure its effect on several intrapersonal (e.g., mood, need to belong) and interpersonal (e.g., prosocial behavior) outcomes, as well as several potential moderators (e.g., percentage of female participants) that may affect the strength of the effect. Overall, the results demonstrated that the positive effects of interpersonal coordination are robust, with a few exceptions specific to intrapersonal outcomes. These findings provide a much-needed quantitative summary of the literature on interpersonal coordination, and highlight areas that merit future research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Because numerous studies incorporated several different outcomes (e.g., liking of partner and rating of the interaction), it was not possible to incorporate all studies into one meta-analyses and use the outcomes as moderators; doing so would violate the assumption of independence of effects. The current method of organization was the optimal approach to investigating numerous outcomes.

  2. It is important to note that mood here is not to be confused with emotional contagion. The included studies investigating mood did not focus on mimicry of affective facial expressions; instead, they investigated mood as an outcome of interpersonal coordination.

  3. Confederate designs include studies that use confederates and/or experimenters engaging in scripted behaviors.

  4. A number of other moderator analyses were considered, but were not testable due to limited information about the study characteristics. These included gender and age composition of groups/dyads, the number of nonverbal behaviors investigated, and whether the outcome was directed toward the interaction partner or a third party individual.

  5. Unless otherwise specified, the reader may assume that the value given for \(\overline{r}\) represents both unweighted and weighted values because they had the same value.

  6. The moderator analyses were computed for the seven largest meta-analyses when possible. The following are exceptions: the authority moderator was only computed for the prosocial and interdependent self-construal meta-analyses, the naïve versus confederate design moderator was computed for all meta-analyses except liking, and the facial mimicry moderator was computed for all meta-analyses except for evaluations of the interaction.

References

(* indicates study in at least one meta-analysis)

  • Arbib, M. (2005). From monkey-like action recognition to human language: An evolutionary framework for neurolinguistics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28, 105–167. doi:10.1017/S0140525X05000038.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Aron, A., Aron, E. N., & Smollan, D. (1992). Inclusion of other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63(4), 596. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.4.596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashton-James, C., & Chartrand, T. L. (2009). Social cues for creativity: The impact of behavioral mimicry on convergent and divergent thinking. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1036–1040. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.030.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Ashton-James, C., van Baaren, R. B., Chartrand, T. L., Decety, J., & Karremans, J. (2007). Mimicry and me: The impact of mimicry on self-construal. Social Cognition, 25, 518–535. doi:10.1521/soco.2007.25.4.518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Bailenson, J. N., & Yee, N. (2005). Digital chameleons: Automatic assimilation of nonverbal gestures in immersive virtual environments. Psychological Science, 16, 814–819. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01619.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bailenson, J. N., & Yee, N. (2007). Virtual interpersonal touch and digital chameleons. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31(4), 225–242.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernieri, F. J., Reznick, J. S., & Rosenthal, R. (1988). Synchrony, pseudosynchrony, and dissynchrony: Measuring the entrainment process in mother-infant interactions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 243–253. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.54.2.243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernieri, F. J., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). Interpersonal coordination: Behavior matching and interactional synchrony. In R. S. Feldman & B. Rime (Eds.), Fundamentals of nonverbal behavior (pp. 401–432). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biostat (2014). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (Version 3) [Computer software]. Englewood, NJ: Author. Available from http://www.comprehensive.com

  • Brass, M., Bekkering, H., & Prinz, W. (2001). Movement observation affects movement execution in a simple response task. Acta Psychologica, 106, 3–22. doi:10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00024-X.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, S. E., Galati, A., & Kuhlen, A. K. (2010). Two minds, one dialog: Coordinating speaking and understanding. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 53, 301–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Byrne, D. (1971). The attraction paradigm. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cappella, J. N., & Planalp, S. (1981). Talk and silence sequences in informal conversations: III. Interspeaker influence. Human Communication Research, 7(2), 117–132. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2958.1981.tb00564.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carney, D. R., Colvin, C. R., & Hall, J. A. (2007). A thin slice perspective on the accuracy of first impressions. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1054–1072. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2007.01.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *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. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., & Lakin, J. (2013). The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. The Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 285–308. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-113011-143754.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., Maddux, W. W., & Lakin, J. L. (2005). Beyond the perception-behavior link: The ubiquitous utility and motivational moderators of nonconscious mimicry. In R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, J. A. Bargh, R. R. Hassin, J. S. Uleman, & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The new unconscious (pp. 334–361). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1977). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (rev ed.). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, E. E., Ejsmond-Frey, R., Knight, N., & Dunbar, R. I. (2010). Rowers’ high: Behavioural synchrony is correlated with elevated pain thresholds. Biology Letters, 6, 106–108. doi:10.1098/rsbl.2009.0670.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Condon, W. S., & Sander, L. W. (1974). Synchrony demonstrated between movements of the neonate and adult speech. Child Development, 45, 456–462. doi:10.2307/1127968.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Croson, R., & Marks, M. (2000). Step returns in threshold public goods: A meta- and experimental analysis. Experimental Economics, 2, 239–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, A. N., Chartrand, T. L., & Finkel, E. J. (2010). The schema-driven chameleon: How mimicry affects executive and self-regulatory resources. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 605–617. doi:10.1037/a0017629.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Fenigstein, A. (1979). Self-consciousness, self-attention, and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 75–86. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.1.75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Finkel, E. J., Campbell, W. K., Brunell, A. B., Dalton, A. N., Scarbeck, S. J., & Chartrand, T. L. (2006). High-maintenance interaction: Inefficient social coordination impairs self-regulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 456–475. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.456.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Fischer-Lokou, J., Martin, A., & Guéguen, N. (2011). Mimicry and propagation of prosocial behavior in a natural setting. Psychological Reports, 108, 599–605. doi:10.2466/07.17.21.PR0.108.2.599-605.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gallese, V. (2003). The manifold nature of interpersonal relations: The quest for a common mechanism. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 358, 517–528. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1234.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Gatewood, J. B., & Rosenwein, R. (1981). Interactional synchrony: Genuine or spurious? A critique of recent research. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 6, 12–29. doi:10.1007/BF00987933.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Guéguen, N. (2009). Mimicry and seduction: An evaluation in a courtship context. Social Influence, 4, 249–255. doi:10.1080/15534510802628173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Guéguen, N. (2011). The mimicker is a mirror of myself: Impact of mimicking on self-consciousness and social anxiety. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 39, 725–728. doi:10.2224/sbp.2011.39.6.725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Guéguen, N., Martin, A., & Meineri, S. (2011). Mimicry and helping behavior: An evaluation of mimicry on explicit helping request. Journal of Social Psychology, 151, 1–4. doi:10.1080/00224540903366701.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Guéguen, N., Martin, A., Meineri, S., & Simon, J. (2013). Using mimicry to elicit answers to intimate questions in survey research. Field Methods, 25, 47–57. doi:10.1177/1525822X12449710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hale, J., & Hamilton, A. F. D. C. (2016). Cognitive mechanisms for responding to mimicry from others. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 63, 106–123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, J. A., & Rosenthal, R. (1991). Testing for moderator variables in meta-analysis: Issues and methods. Communication Monographs, 58, 437–448. doi:10.1080/03637759109376240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V. (1982). Fitting categorical models to effect sizes from a series of experiments. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 119–137. doi:10.2307/1164961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hess, U., & Blairy, S. (2001). Facial mimicry and emotional contagion to dynamic emotional facial expressions and their influence on decoding accuracy. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 40(2), 129–141. doi:10.1016/S0167-8760(00)00161-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Hove, M. J., & Risen, J. L. (2009). It’s all in the timing: Interpersonal synchrony increases affiliation. Social Cognition, 27, 949–960. doi:10.1521/soco.2009.27.6.949.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hurley, S. (2008). The shared circuits model (SCM): How control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 31, 1–22. doi:10.1017/S0140525X07003123.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Iacoboni, M. (2005). Understanding others: Imitation, language, empathy. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: From neuroscience to social science (Vol. 1, pp. 77–99)., Mechanisms of imitation and imitation in animals Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inzlicht, M., Gutsell, J. N., & Legault, L. (2012). Mimicry reduces racial prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 361–365. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.06.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kavanagh, L. C., Suhler, C. L., Churchland, P. S., & Winkielman, P. (2011). When it’s an error to mirror: The surprising reputational costs of mimicry. Psychological Science, 22, 1274–1276. doi:10.1177/0956797611418678.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Keller, P. E., Knoblich, G., & Repp, B. H. (2007). Pianists duet better when they play with themselves: On the possible role of action simulation in synchronization. Consciousness and Cognition, 16(1), 102–111.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kirschner, S., & Tomasello, M. (2010). Joint music making promotes prosocial behavior in 4-year old children. Evolution of Human Behavior, 31, 54–64. doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.04.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knoblich, G., & Sebanz, N. (2006). The social nature of perception and action. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 99–104. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2006.00415.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kokal, I., Engel, A., Kirschner, S., & Keysers, C. (2011). Synchronized drumming enhances activity in the caudate and facilitates prosocial commitment—if the rhythm comes easily. PLoS ONE, 6(11), e27272.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • *Kouzakova, M., Karremans, J. C., van Baaren, R. B., & van Knippenberg, A. (2010a). A stranger’s cold shoulder makes the heart grow fonder: Why not being mimicked by a stranger enhances longstanding relationship evaluations. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 87–93. doi:10.1177/1948550609355718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Kouzakova, M., van Baaren, R., & van Knippenberg, A. (2010b). Lack of behavioral imitation in human interactions enhances salivary cortisol levels. Hormones and Behavior, 57, 421–426. doi:10.1016/j.yhbeh.2010.01.011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, M. H., & McPartland, T. S. (1954). An empirical investigation of self-attitudes. American Sociological Review, 19(1), 68–76. doi:10.2307/2088175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulesza, W., Dolinski, D., Huisman, A., & Majewski, R. (2014). The echo effect: The power of verbal mimicry to influence prosocial behavior. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 33, 183–201. doi:10.1177/0261927X13506906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaFrance, M. (1979). Nonverbal synchrony and rapport: Analysis by the cross-lag panel technique. Social Psychology Quarterly, 42(1), 66–70. doi:10.2307/3033875.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakin, J. L., Jefferis, V. E., Cheng, C., & Chartrand, T. L. (2003). The chameleon effect as social glue: Evidence for the evolutionary significance of nonconscious mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 27, 145–162. doi:10.1023/A:1025389814290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., Kelly, K. M., Cottrell, C. A., & Schreindorfer, L. S. (2013). Construct validity of the need to belong scale: Mapping the nomological network. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(6), 610–624. doi:10.1080/00223891.2013.819511.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leander, N. P., Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (2012). You give me the chills: Embodied reactions to inappropriate amounts of behavioral mimicry. Psychological Science, 23, 772–779. doi:10.1177/0956797611434535.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Leander, N. P., Chartrand, T. L., & Wood, W. (2011). Mind your mannerisms: Behavioral mimicry elicits stereotype conformity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 195–201. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leary, M. R., Kelly, K. M., Cottrell, C. A., & Schreindorfer, L. S. (2007). Individual differences in the need to belong: Mapping the nomological network. Unpublished manuscript, Duke University, Durham, NC.

  • Lerner, M. J. (1980). The belief in a just world. New York: Plenum Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Liebowitz, M. R. (1987). Social phobia. Modern Problems in Pharmacopsychiatry., 22, 141–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Likowski, K. U., Weyers, P., Seibt, B., Stöhr, C., Pauli, P., & Mühlberger, A. (2011). Sad and lonely? Sad mood suppresses facial mimicry. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 35, 101–117. doi:10.1007/s10919-011-0107-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipkus, I. M., Dalbert, C., & Siegler, I. C. (1996). The importance of distinguishing the belief in a just world for self versus for others: Implications for psychological well-being. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22(7), 666–677. doi:10.1177/0146167296227002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Lumsden, J., Miles, L. K., & Macrae, C. (2014). Sync or sink? Interpersonal synchrony impacts self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology,. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01064.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Macrae, C. N., Duffy, O. K., Miles, L. K., & Lawrence, J. (2008). A case of hand waving: Action synchrony and person perception. Cognition, 109(1), 152–156.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maddux, W. W., Mullen, E., & Galinsky, A. D. (2008). Chameleons bake bigger pies and take bigger pieces: Strategic behavioral mimicry facilitates negotiation outcomes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 461–468. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2007.02.003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maringer, M., Krumhuber, E. G., Fischer, A. H., & Niedenthal, P. M. (2011). Beyond smile dynamics: Mimicry and beliefs in judgments of smiles. Emotion, 11, 181–187. doi:10.1037/a0022596.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self-implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.98.2.224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marsh, K. L., Richardson, M. J., & Schmidt, R. C. (2009). Social connection through joint action and interpersonal coordination. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1(2), 320–339.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, G., Jones, D. M., & Chamberlain, A. G. (1990). Refining the measurement of mood: The UWIST Mood Adjective Checklist. The British Journal of Psychology, 81, 17–42. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8295.1990.tb02343.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meltzoff, A. (2005). Imitation and other minds: The “like me” hypothesis. In S. Hurley & N. Chater (Eds.), Perspectives on imitation: From neuroscience to social science (Vol. 2, pp. 55–77). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Muller, B. C., Maaskant, A. J., van Baaren, R. B., & Dijksterhuis, A. (2012). Prosocial consequences of imitation. Psychological Reports, 110, 891–898. doi:10.2466/07.09.21.PR0.110.3.891-898.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Reddish, P., Bulbulia, J., & Fischer, R. (2014). Does synchrony promote generalized prosociality? Religion, Brain & Behavior, 4, 1–17. doi:10.1080/2153599X.2013.764545.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Reddish, P., Fischer, R., & Bulbulia, J. (2013). Let’s dance together: Synchrony, shared intentionality and cooperation. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e71182. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0071182.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M. J., Marsh, K. L., Isenhower, R. W., Goodman, J. R. L., & Schmidt, R. C. (2007). Rocking together: Dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science, 26, 867–891. doi:10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.002.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, M. J., Marsh, K. L., & Schmidt, R. C. (2005). Effects of visual and verbal interaction on unintentional interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31(1), 62–79. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.1.62.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Gallese, V., & Fogassi, L. (1996). Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive Brain Research, 3, 131–141. doi:10.1016/0926-6410(95)00038-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1979). The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 638–641. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R. (1991). Meta-analytic procedures for social research (Vol. 6). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, R., & Rubin, D. B. (1986). Meta-analytic procedures for combining studies with multiple effect sizes. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 400–406. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Sanchez-Burks, J., Bartel, C., & Blount, S. (2009). Performance in intercultural interactions at work: Cross-cultural differences in response to behavioral mirroring. Journal of Applied Psychology, 94, 216–223. doi:10.1037/a0012829.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheflen, A. E. (1964). The significance of posture in communication systems. Psychiatry Journal for the Study of Interpersonal Processes, 27, 316–331. doi:10.1521/00332747.1964.11023403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheier, M. F., & Carver, C. S. (1985). The Self-Consciousness Scale: A revised version for use with general populations. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 15(8), 687–699. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.1985.tb02268.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, R. C., & Richardson, M. J. (2008). Dynamics of interpersonal coordination. In Coordination: Neural, behavioral and social dynamics (pp. 281-308). Springer, Berlin

  • Semin, G. R., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2008). Grounding social cognition: Synchronization, entrainment, and coordination. In G. R. Semin & E. R. Smith (Eds.), Embodied grounding: Social, cognitive, affective, and neuroscientific approaches (pp. 119–147). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • *Shaw, D. J., Czekóová, K., Chromec, J., Mareček, R., & Brázdil, M. (2013). Copying you copying me: Interpersonal motor co-ordination influences automatic imitation. PLoS ONE, 8(12), e84820. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0084820.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Spielberger, C. D., Vagg, P. R., Barker, L. R., Donham, G. W., & Westberry, L. G. (1980). The factor structure of the state-trait anxiety inventory. Stress and Anxiety, 7, 95–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stel, M., Blascovich, J., McCall, C., Mastop, J., van Baaren, R. B., & Vonk, R. (2010). Mimicking disliked others: Effects of a priori liking on the mimicry-liking link. European Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 867–880. doi:10.1002/ejsp.655.

    Google Scholar 

  • *Stel, M., & Harinck, F. (2011). Being mimicked makes you a prosocial voter. Experimental Psychology, 58, 79–84. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000070.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Stel, M., Müller, B. C. N., Vonk, R., Redeker, M., & van Baaren, R. B. (submitted). Mimicry communicates empathy: Effects of being mimicked on feeling empathized with. Unpublished manuscript, Tilburg University, Tilburg.

  • *Stel, M., Rispens, S., Leliveld, M., & Lokhorst, A. M. (2011). The consequences of mimicry for prosocials and proselfs: Effects of social value orientation on the mimicry–liking link. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 269–274. doi:10.1002/ejsp.790.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stel, M., van Baaren, R. B., & Vonk, R. (2008). Effects of mimicking: Acting prosocially by being emotionally moved. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 965–976. doi:10.1002/ejsp.472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Stel, M., van den Bos, K., Sim, S., & Rispens, S. (2013). Mimicry and just world beliefs: Mimicking makes men view the world as more personally just. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52, 397–411. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02084.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stel, M., van Dijk, E., & Olivier, E. (2009). You want to know the truth? Then don’t mimic! Psychological Science, 20, 693–699. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02350.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Stel, M., & Vonk, R. (2010). Mimicry in social interaction: Benefits for mimickers, mimickees, and their interaction. British Journal of Psychology, 101, 311–323. doi:10.1348/000712609X465424.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Termine, N. T., & Izard, C. E. (1988). Infants’ responses to their mothers’ expressions of joy and sadness. Developmental Psychology, 24, 223–229. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.24.2.223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiedens, L. Z., & Fragale, A. R. (2003). Power moves: Complementarity in dominant and submissive nonverbal behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 558–568. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.3.558.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tschacher, W., Rees, G. M., & Ramseyer, F. (2014). Nonverbal synchrony and affect in dyadic interactions. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 1323. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01323.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • *Valdesolo, P., & DeSteno, D. (2011). Synchrony and the social tuning of compassion. Emotion, 11, 262–266. doi:10.1037/a0021302.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *Valdesolo, P., Ouyang, J., & DeSteno, D. (2010). The rhythm of joint action: Synchrony promotes cooperative ability. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 693–695. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.03.004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Baaren, R. B., Fockenberg, D. A., Holland, R. W., Janssen, L., & van Knippenberg, A. (2006). The moody chameleon: The effect of mood on non-conscious mimicry. Social Cognition, 24, 426–437. doi:10.1521/soco.2006.24.4.426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *van Baaren, R. B., Holland, R. W., Kawakami, K., & van Knippenberg, A. (2004a). Mimicry and prosocial behavior. Psychological Science, 15, 71–74. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.01501012.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Baaren, R. B., Horgan, T. G., Chartrand, T. L., & Dijkmans, M. (2004b). The forest, the trees, and the chameleon: Context dependence and mimicry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 453–459. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.453.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, M. L., van Baaren, R. B., Martin, D., Dijksterhuis, A., & Bekkering, H. (2009). Executive functioning and imitation: Increasing working memory load facilitates behavioural imitation. Neuropsychologia, 47, 3265–3270. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.06.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • *van Swol, L. M. (2003). The effects of nonverbal mirroring on perceived persuasiveness, agreement with an imitator, and reciprocity in a group discussion. Communication Research, 30, 461–480. doi:10.1177/0093650203253318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Vrijsen, J. M., Lang, W.-G., Dotsch, R., Wigboldus, D. H. J., & Rinck, M. (2010). How do socially anxious women evaluate mimicry? A virtual reality study. Cognition and Emotion, 24, 840–847. doi:10.1080/13854040902833652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wheatley, T., Kang, O., Parkinson, C., & Looser, C. E. (2012). From mind perception to mental connection: Synchrony as a mechanism for social understanding. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6(8), 589–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wiltermuth, S. S. (2012a). Synchronous activity boosts compliance with requests to aggress. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 453–456. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.10.007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wiltermuth, S. S. (2012b). Synchrony and destructive obedience. Social Influence, 7, 78–89. doi:10.1080/15534510.2012.658653.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • *Wiltermuth, S. S. (2015). Synchrony reduces subsequent public self consciousness. Unpublished manuscript, USC Marshall School of Business, Los Angeles, CA

  • *Wiltermuth, S. S., & Heath, C. (2009). Synchrony and cooperation. Psychological Science, 20, 1–5. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02253.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Judith A. Hall for her guidance with meta-analysis techniques and Frank J. Bernieri for his suggestions regarding the conceptual issues behind this work.

Author information

Author notes

    Authors and Affiliations

    1. Northeastern University, Boston, MA, USA

      Ishabel M. Vicaria & Leah Dickens

    Authors
    1. Ishabel M. Vicaria
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    2. Leah Dickens
      View author publications

      You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

    Corresponding author

    Correspondence to Ishabel M. Vicaria.

    Additional information

    Ishabel M. Vicaria and Leah Dickens have contributed equally to this paper.

    Rights and permissions

    Reprints and permissions

    About this article

    Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

    Cite this article

    Vicaria, I.M., Dickens, L. Meta-Analyses of the Intra- and Interpersonal Outcomes of Interpersonal Coordination. J Nonverbal Behav 40, 335–361 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-016-0238-8

    Download citation

    • Published:

    • Issue Date:

    • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10919-016-0238-8

    Keywords

    Search

    Navigation