Межличностная координация: системные аспекты и социально-психофизиологические факторы (обзор)
Ключевые слова:
совместная деятельность, кооперация, межличностная координация, пространственно-временная адаптация, прогнозирование, сенсомоторная коммуникация, социальная память, просоциальность
Аннотация
Обоснование. Представлены исследования, посвященные системным аспектам и влиянию социально-психофизиологических факторов на успешность совместной деятельности. Цель: системный анализ результатов исследований межличностной координации, влияния на нее психологических и социальных факторов, взаимосвязей с аффилиативным поведением и формированием социальной памяти. Результаты. В первом разделе обзора проанализированы когнитивно-моторные механизмы (совместное внимание, прогнозирование, взаимная пространственно-временная адаптация), обеспечивающие взаимосодействие и точную межличностную координацию нескольких субъектов. Показано, что прогнозирование и непрерывный взаимный мониторинг действий облегчают межличностную координацию, позволяя людям планировать собственное поведение с учетом возможных действий других. Для успешного решения совместных задач требуется определенная степень межличностной интеграции, на которую влияют намерения субъектов взаимодействия, знание программы действий и планируемого результата. В ситуациях, когда информация о ходе выполнения совместных заданий недоступна, для облегчения межсубъектной координации могут использоваться такие поведенческие стратегии, как снижение временной изменчивости собственных действий и специализация вкладов партнеров. Одной из форм взаимодействий, способствующих успешной межличностной кооперации, является сенсомоторная коммуникация, проявляющаяся в систематическом отклонении инструментальных действий от наиболее эффективного способа выполнения с целью предоставления соисполнителю дополнительной информации (обратной связи) о собственных намерениях. Второй раздел обзора посвящен двунаправленной связи психосоциальных факторов и межличностной координации. С одной стороны, установки, мотивационная структура, локус контроля, общая склонность человека к социальным контактам определяют успешность совместной деятельности и поведенческие стратегии людей; с другой, опыт совместной ритмичной деятельности приводит к усилению просоциальных установок (доверие, симпатия) и аффилиативного поведения (сотрудничества) субъектов. Заключение. Показано, что эффекты подобных взаимодействий могут сохраняться в виде социальной памяти и влиять на последующее поведение и взаимоотношения людей. Результаты изучения закономерностей, определяющих успешность совместной деятельности, могут быть использованы для улучшения взаимодействия персонала с пациентом в медицинской практике, подбора эффективно работающих команд, оптимизации условий труда, а также для усовершенствования роботизированных систем.
Скачивания
Данные скачивания пока не доступны.
Литература
1. Harry B., Keller P. Tutorial and simulations with ADAM: an adaptation and anticipation model of sensorimotor synchronization. Biological Cybernetics, 2019; 113. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00422-019-00798-6
2. Wahn B., König P. and Kingstone A. Interpersonal coordination in joint multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 2021; 47(9):1166–1181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000935
3. Curioni A., Vesper C., Knoblich G., Sebanz N. Reciprocal information flow and role distribution support joint action coordination. Cognition. 2019;187:21–31. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.02.006
4. Pecenka N., Engel A., Keller P. Neural correlates of auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00380 (accessed: 26.05.2022).
5. Liebermann-Jordanidis H., Novembre G., Koch I., Keller P. Simultaneous self-other integration and segregation support real-time interpersonal coordination in a musical joint action task. Acta Psychologica, 2021; 218:103348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103348
6. Fairhurst M., Keller P., Janata P. Distinguishing “self” from “other” in a dynamic synchronization task with an adaptive virtual partner. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/625061
7. Loehr J.D. The sense of agency in joint action: An integrative review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02051-3
8. Walter J., Buon M, Glaviaux B, Brunel L. Excluded but not alone. Does social exclusion prevent the occurrence of a Joint Simon Effect (JSE)? Acta Psychologica. 2021; 218:103337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103337
9. Ciardo F., Wykowska A. Response Coordination Emerges in Cooperative but Not Competitive Joint Task. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9:1919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01919
10. Loehr J.D. Shared credit for shared success: Successful joint performance strengthens the sense of joint agency. Consciousness and Cognition. 2018; 66:79–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.concog.2018.11.001
11. Beaurenaut M., Dezecache G., Grèzes J. Action co-representation under threat: A Social Simon study. Cognition. 2021; 215:104829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104829
12. van der Weiden A., Porcu E., Liepelt R. Action prediction modulates self-other integration in joint action. Psychological Research [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01674-y
13. Varlet M., Nozaradan S, Nijhuis P, Keller P. Neural tracking and integration of “self” and “other” in improvised interpersonal coordination. NeuroImage. 2019; 206:116303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116303
14. Vesper C, van der Wel RPRD, Knoblich G, Sebanz N. Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance. 2013; 39(1):48–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028066
15. Tidoni E., Candidi M. Commentary: Understanding intentions from actions: Direct perception, inference, and the roles of mirror and mentalizing systems. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2016; 10. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00013 (accessed: 14.06.2022).
16. Schmidt S.N.L., Hass J, Kirsch P, Mier D. The human mirror neuron system-A common neural basis for social cognition? Psychophysiology. 2021; 58(5):e13781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13781
17. Chackochan V.T., Sanguineti V. Incomplete information about the partner affects the development of collaborative strategies in joint action. PLoS Computational Biology. 2019; 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006385
18. Vesper C., Abramova E, Bütepage J. et al. Joint Action: Mental Representations, Shared Information and General Mechanisms for Coordinating with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 7: Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02039 (accessed: 5.04.2022).
19. Huys R. Kolodziej A, Lagarde J. et al. Individual and dyadic rope turning as a window into social coordination. Human Movement Science. 2018; 58:55–68. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.humov.2017.12.015
20. Tatti F., Baud-Bovy G. Force sharing and other collaborative strategies in a dyadic force perception task. PloS One. 2018; 13(2):e0192754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192754
21. Vesper C., Sevdalis V. Informing, coordinating, and performing a perspective on functions of sensorimotor communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2020; 14:168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00168
22. Pezzulo G., Donnarumma F., Dindo H. et al. The body talks: Sensorimotor communication and its brain and kinematic signatures. Physics of Life Reviews, 2019; 28:1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.06.014
23. Ujitoko Y., Kawabe T. Visual estimation of the force applied by another person. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12(1):6216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10243-7.
24. Colley I., Varlet M., Macritchie J., Keller P. The influence of a conductor and co-performer on auditory-motor synchronisation, temporal prediction, and ancillary entrainment in a musical drumming task. Human Movement Science. 2020; 72:102653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102653
25. Timmers R., Macritchie J, Schabrun S. et al. Neural multimodal integration underlying synchronization with a co-performer in music: Influences of motor expertise and visual information. Neuroscience Letters. 2020; 721:134803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134803
26. Field E., Harris D. A comparative survey of the utility of cross-cockpit linkages and autoflight systems’ backfeed to the control inceptors of commercial aircraft’. 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/001401398186216
27. Takagi A., Hirashima M., Nozaki D., Burdet E. Individuals physically interacting in a group rapidly coordinate their movement by estimating the collective goal. eLife. 2019; 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41328
28. Richardson M.J., Marsh K.L., Isenhower R.W. et al. Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science. 2007; 26(6):867–891. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.002
29. Darda K.M., Ramsey R. The inhibition of automatic imitation: a meta-analysis and synthesis of fMRI studies’. bioRxiv. 2019; 334938. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/334938
30. Dignath D., Lotze-Hermes P., Farmer H., Pfister R. Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation. Psychological Research.2018; 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0854-x
31. Safarpour A. EPR: A Theory of Prejudice Reduction and Support for Racial Policies. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10633.31847
32. Genschow O., Cracco E., Verbeke P. et al. Similarity and automatic imitation. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jnf8t
33. Van der Weiden A., Pril D., Dittrich K. et al. How vertical elevation affects self-other integration as measured by the joint Simon effect. Acta Psychologica. 2021; 220:103404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103404
34. Farwaha S., Obhi S. The Effects of Online Status on Self-Other Processing as Revealed by Automatic Imitation. Social Cognition.2021; 39:295–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2021.39.2.295
35. Farwaha S., Obhi S. Socioeconomic status and self-other processing: socioeconomic status predicts interference in the automatic imitation task. Experimental Brain Research. 2020; 238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05761-7
36. Novembre G., Mitsopoulos Z., Keller P. Empathic perspective taking promotes interpersonal coordination through music. Scientific Reports. 2019; 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48556-9
37. Paxton A., Dale R. Argument disrupts interpersonal synchrony. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2013; 66(11):2092–2102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.853089
38. Lumsden J., Miles L.K., Macrae C.N. Sync or sink? Interpersonal synchrony impacts self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ fpsyg.2014.01064 (accessed: 16.06.2022).
39. Fairhurst M.T., Janata P., Keller P.E. Leading the follower: an fMRI investigation of dynamic cooperativity and leader-follower strategies in synchronization with an adaptive virtual partner. NeuroImage. 2014; 84:688–697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.027
40. Chang A., Livingstone S.R., Bosnyak D.J., Trainor L.J. Body sway reflects joint emotional expression in music ensemble performance. Scientific Reports.2019; 9(1):1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1617657114
41. Bieńkiewicz M., Smykovskyi A., Olugbade T. et al. Bridging the gap between emotion and joint action. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews [Preprint]. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.neubiorev.2021.08.014
42. Clayton M., Jakubowski K., Eerola T. et al. Interpersonal Entrainment in Music Performance. Music Perception. 2020; 38:136–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2020.38.2.136
43. Cohen E., Davis A., Taylor J. Interdependence, bonding and support are associated with improved mental wellbeing following an outdoor team challenge. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12351
44. Rauchbauer B., Grosbras M.-H. Developmental trajectory of interpersonal motor alignment: Positive social effects and link to social cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2020; 118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.032
45. Woolhouse M.H., Tidhar D., Cross I. Effects on Inter-Personal Memory of Dancing in Time with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7:167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00167
46. Vitale E., Smith A. Neurobiology of Loneliness, Isolation, and Loss: Integrating Human and Animal Perspectives. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2022; 16:846315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.846315
47. Jackson J.C., Jong J, Bilkey D.et al. Synchrony and Physiological Arousal Increase Cohesion and Cooperation in Large Naturalistic Groups. Scientific Reports. 2018; 8(1):127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18023-4
48. Wilson S., Gos C. Perceiving social cohesion: movement synchrony and task demands both matter. Perception. 2019; 48(4):316–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619837878
49. Cross L., Michael J., Wilsdon L. et al. Still want to help? Interpersonal coordination’s effects on helping behaviour after a 24 hour delay. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 206:103062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103062
50. Tunçgenç B., Cohen E. Interpersonal movement synchrony facilitates pro-social behavior in children’s peer-play. Developmental Science. 2018; 21(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12505
51. Howard E.M., Ropar D., Newport R., Tunçgenç B. Social context facilitates visuomotor synchrony and bonding in children and adults. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11(1):22869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02372-2
52. Crossey B.P., Atherton G., Cross L. Lost in the crowd: Imagining walking in synchrony with a crowd increases affiliation and deindividuation. PloS One. 2021; 16(7):e0254017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254017
53. Lee H., Launay J., Stewart L. Signals through music and dance: Perceived social bonds and formidability on collective movement. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 208:103093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103093
54. Cirelli L.K. How interpersonal synchrony facilitates early prosocial behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2018; 20:35–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.009
55. Nordham C.A., Tognoli E., Fuchs A., Kelso J.A.S. How Interpersonal Coordination Affects Individual Behavior (and Vice Versa): Experimental analysis and adaptive HKB model of social memory. Ecological psychology : a publication of the International Society for Ecological Psychology. 2018; 30(3):224–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2018.1438196
56. Prior N.H. What’s in a moment: what can be learned about pair bonding from studying moment-to-moment behavioral synchrony between partners? Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11:1370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370
57. Анохин П.К. Очерки по физиологии функциональных систем. М.: Книга по требованию, 2021. 450 с. [Anokhin P.K. Ocherki po fiziologii funktsional'nykh sistem [Essays on the physiology of functional systems]. Moscow. Kniga po trebovaniyu Publ. 2021:450. (in Russ.)]
58. Mende M.A., Schmidt H. Psychotherapy in the framework of embodied cognition-does interpersonal synchrony influence therapy success? Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021; 12:562490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.562490
2. Wahn B., König P. and Kingstone A. Interpersonal coordination in joint multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 2021; 47(9):1166–1181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000935
3. Curioni A., Vesper C., Knoblich G., Sebanz N. Reciprocal information flow and role distribution support joint action coordination. Cognition. 2019;187:21–31. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.02.006
4. Pecenka N., Engel A., Keller P. Neural correlates of auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00380 (accessed: 26.05.2022).
5. Liebermann-Jordanidis H., Novembre G., Koch I., Keller P. Simultaneous self-other integration and segregation support real-time interpersonal coordination in a musical joint action task. Acta Psychologica, 2021; 218:103348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103348
6. Fairhurst M., Keller P., Janata P. Distinguishing “self” from “other” in a dynamic synchronization task with an adaptive virtual partner. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/625061
7. Loehr J.D. The sense of agency in joint action: An integrative review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02051-3
8. Walter J., Buon M, Glaviaux B, Brunel L. Excluded but not alone. Does social exclusion prevent the occurrence of a Joint Simon Effect (JSE)? Acta Psychologica. 2021; 218:103337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103337
9. Ciardo F., Wykowska A. Response Coordination Emerges in Cooperative but Not Competitive Joint Task. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9:1919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01919
10. Loehr J.D. Shared credit for shared success: Successful joint performance strengthens the sense of joint agency. Consciousness and Cognition. 2018; 66:79–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.concog.2018.11.001
11. Beaurenaut M., Dezecache G., Grèzes J. Action co-representation under threat: A Social Simon study. Cognition. 2021; 215:104829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104829
12. van der Weiden A., Porcu E., Liepelt R. Action prediction modulates self-other integration in joint action. Psychological Research [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01674-y
13. Varlet M., Nozaradan S, Nijhuis P, Keller P. Neural tracking and integration of “self” and “other” in improvised interpersonal coordination. NeuroImage. 2019; 206:116303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116303
14. Vesper C, van der Wel RPRD, Knoblich G, Sebanz N. Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance. 2013; 39(1):48–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028066
15. Tidoni E., Candidi M. Commentary: Understanding intentions from actions: Direct perception, inference, and the roles of mirror and mentalizing systems. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2016; 10. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00013 (accessed: 14.06.2022).
16. Schmidt S.N.L., Hass J, Kirsch P, Mier D. The human mirror neuron system-A common neural basis for social cognition? Psychophysiology. 2021; 58(5):e13781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13781
17. Chackochan V.T., Sanguineti V. Incomplete information about the partner affects the development of collaborative strategies in joint action. PLoS Computational Biology. 2019; 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006385
18. Vesper C., Abramova E, Bütepage J. et al. Joint Action: Mental Representations, Shared Information and General Mechanisms for Coordinating with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 7: Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02039 (accessed: 5.04.2022).
19. Huys R. Kolodziej A, Lagarde J. et al. Individual and dyadic rope turning as a window into social coordination. Human Movement Science. 2018; 58:55–68. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.humov.2017.12.015
20. Tatti F., Baud-Bovy G. Force sharing and other collaborative strategies in a dyadic force perception task. PloS One. 2018; 13(2):e0192754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192754
21. Vesper C., Sevdalis V. Informing, coordinating, and performing a perspective on functions of sensorimotor communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2020; 14:168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00168
22. Pezzulo G., Donnarumma F., Dindo H. et al. The body talks: Sensorimotor communication and its brain and kinematic signatures. Physics of Life Reviews, 2019; 28:1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.06.014
23. Ujitoko Y., Kawabe T. Visual estimation of the force applied by another person. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12(1):6216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10243-7.
24. Colley I., Varlet M., Macritchie J., Keller P. The influence of a conductor and co-performer on auditory-motor synchronisation, temporal prediction, and ancillary entrainment in a musical drumming task. Human Movement Science. 2020; 72:102653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102653
25. Timmers R., Macritchie J, Schabrun S. et al. Neural multimodal integration underlying synchronization with a co-performer in music: Influences of motor expertise and visual information. Neuroscience Letters. 2020; 721:134803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134803
26. Field E., Harris D. A comparative survey of the utility of cross-cockpit linkages and autoflight systems’ backfeed to the control inceptors of commercial aircraft’. 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/001401398186216
27. Takagi A., Hirashima M., Nozaki D., Burdet E. Individuals physically interacting in a group rapidly coordinate their movement by estimating the collective goal. eLife. 2019; 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41328
28. Richardson M.J., Marsh K.L., Isenhower R.W. et al. Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science. 2007; 26(6):867–891. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.002
29. Darda K.M., Ramsey R. The inhibition of automatic imitation: a meta-analysis and synthesis of fMRI studies’. bioRxiv. 2019; 334938. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/334938
30. Dignath D., Lotze-Hermes P., Farmer H., Pfister R. Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation. Psychological Research.2018; 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0854-x
31. Safarpour A. EPR: A Theory of Prejudice Reduction and Support for Racial Policies. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10633.31847
32. Genschow O., Cracco E., Verbeke P. et al. Similarity and automatic imitation. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jnf8t
33. Van der Weiden A., Pril D., Dittrich K. et al. How vertical elevation affects self-other integration as measured by the joint Simon effect. Acta Psychologica. 2021; 220:103404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103404
34. Farwaha S., Obhi S. The Effects of Online Status on Self-Other Processing as Revealed by Automatic Imitation. Social Cognition.2021; 39:295–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2021.39.2.295
35. Farwaha S., Obhi S. Socioeconomic status and self-other processing: socioeconomic status predicts interference in the automatic imitation task. Experimental Brain Research. 2020; 238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05761-7
36. Novembre G., Mitsopoulos Z., Keller P. Empathic perspective taking promotes interpersonal coordination through music. Scientific Reports. 2019; 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48556-9
37. Paxton A., Dale R. Argument disrupts interpersonal synchrony. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2013; 66(11):2092–2102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.853089
38. Lumsden J., Miles L.K., Macrae C.N. Sync or sink? Interpersonal synchrony impacts self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ fpsyg.2014.01064 (accessed: 16.06.2022).
39. Fairhurst M.T., Janata P., Keller P.E. Leading the follower: an fMRI investigation of dynamic cooperativity and leader-follower strategies in synchronization with an adaptive virtual partner. NeuroImage. 2014; 84:688–697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.027
40. Chang A., Livingstone S.R., Bosnyak D.J., Trainor L.J. Body sway reflects joint emotional expression in music ensemble performance. Scientific Reports.2019; 9(1):1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1617657114
41. Bieńkiewicz M., Smykovskyi A., Olugbade T. et al. Bridging the gap between emotion and joint action. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews [Preprint]. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.neubiorev.2021.08.014
42. Clayton M., Jakubowski K., Eerola T. et al. Interpersonal Entrainment in Music Performance. Music Perception. 2020; 38:136–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2020.38.2.136
43. Cohen E., Davis A., Taylor J. Interdependence, bonding and support are associated with improved mental wellbeing following an outdoor team challenge. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12351
44. Rauchbauer B., Grosbras M.-H. Developmental trajectory of interpersonal motor alignment: Positive social effects and link to social cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2020; 118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.032
45. Woolhouse M.H., Tidhar D., Cross I. Effects on Inter-Personal Memory of Dancing in Time with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7:167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00167
46. Vitale E., Smith A. Neurobiology of Loneliness, Isolation, and Loss: Integrating Human and Animal Perspectives. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2022; 16:846315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.846315
47. Jackson J.C., Jong J, Bilkey D.et al. Synchrony and Physiological Arousal Increase Cohesion and Cooperation in Large Naturalistic Groups. Scientific Reports. 2018; 8(1):127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18023-4
48. Wilson S., Gos C. Perceiving social cohesion: movement synchrony and task demands both matter. Perception. 2019; 48(4):316–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619837878
49. Cross L., Michael J., Wilsdon L. et al. Still want to help? Interpersonal coordination’s effects on helping behaviour after a 24 hour delay. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 206:103062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103062
50. Tunçgenç B., Cohen E. Interpersonal movement synchrony facilitates pro-social behavior in children’s peer-play. Developmental Science. 2018; 21(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12505
51. Howard E.M., Ropar D., Newport R., Tunçgenç B. Social context facilitates visuomotor synchrony and bonding in children and adults. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11(1):22869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02372-2
52. Crossey B.P., Atherton G., Cross L. Lost in the crowd: Imagining walking in synchrony with a crowd increases affiliation and deindividuation. PloS One. 2021; 16(7):e0254017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254017
53. Lee H., Launay J., Stewart L. Signals through music and dance: Perceived social bonds and formidability on collective movement. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 208:103093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103093
54. Cirelli L.K. How interpersonal synchrony facilitates early prosocial behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2018; 20:35–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.009
55. Nordham C.A., Tognoli E., Fuchs A., Kelso J.A.S. How Interpersonal Coordination Affects Individual Behavior (and Vice Versa): Experimental analysis and adaptive HKB model of social memory. Ecological psychology : a publication of the International Society for Ecological Psychology. 2018; 30(3):224–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2018.1438196
56. Prior N.H. What’s in a moment: what can be learned about pair bonding from studying moment-to-moment behavioral synchrony between partners? Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11:1370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370
57. Анохин П.К. Очерки по физиологии функциональных систем. М.: Книга по требованию, 2021. 450 с. [Anokhin P.K. Ocherki po fiziologii funktsional'nykh sistem [Essays on the physiology of functional systems]. Moscow. Kniga po trebovaniyu Publ. 2021:450. (in Russ.)]
58. Mende M.A., Schmidt H. Psychotherapy in the framework of embodied cognition-does interpersonal synchrony influence therapy success? Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021; 12:562490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.562490
2. Wahn B., König P. and Kingstone A. Interpersonal coordination in joint multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 2021; 47(9):1166–1181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000935
3. Curioni A., Vesper C., Knoblich G., Sebanz N. Reciprocal information flow and role distribution support joint action coordination. Cognition. 2019;187:21–31. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.02.006
4. Pecenka N., Engel A., Keller P. Neural correlates of auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00380 (accessed: 26.05.2022).
5. Liebermann-Jordanidis H., Novembre G., Koch I., Keller P. Simultaneous self-other integration and segregation support real-time interpersonal coordination in a musical joint action task. Acta Psychologica, 2021; 218:103348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103348
6. Fairhurst M., Keller P., Janata P. Distinguishing “self” from “other” in a dynamic synchronization task with an adaptive virtual partner. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/625061
7. Loehr J.D. The sense of agency in joint action: An integrative review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02051-3
8. Walter J., Buon M, Glaviaux B, Brunel L. Excluded but not alone. Does social exclusion prevent the occurrence of a Joint Simon Effect (JSE)? Acta Psychologica. 2021; 218:103337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103337
9. Ciardo F., Wykowska A. Response Coordination Emerges in Cooperative but Not Competitive Joint Task. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9:1919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01919
10. Loehr J.D. Shared credit for shared success: Successful joint performance strengthens the sense of joint agency. Consciousness and Cognition. 2018; 66:79–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.concog.2018.11.001
11. Beaurenaut M., Dezecache G., Grèzes J. Action co-representation under threat: A Social Simon study. Cognition. 2021; 215:104829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104829
12. van der Weiden A., Porcu E., Liepelt R. Action prediction modulates self-other integration in joint action. Psychological Research [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01674-y
13. Varlet M., Nozaradan S, Nijhuis P, Keller P. Neural tracking and integration of “self” and “other” in improvised interpersonal coordination. NeuroImage. 2019; 206:116303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116303
14. Vesper C, van der Wel RPRD, Knoblich G, Sebanz N. Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance. 2013; 39(1):48–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028066
15. Tidoni E., Candidi M. Commentary: Understanding intentions from actions: Direct perception, inference, and the roles of mirror and mentalizing systems. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2016; 10. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00013 (accessed: 14.06.2022).
16. Schmidt S.N.L., Hass J, Kirsch P, Mier D. The human mirror neuron system-A common neural basis for social cognition? Psychophysiology. 2021; 58(5):e13781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13781
17. Chackochan V.T., Sanguineti V. Incomplete information about the partner affects the development of collaborative strategies in joint action. PLoS Computational Biology. 2019; 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006385
18. Vesper C., Abramova E, Bütepage J. et al. Joint Action: Mental Representations, Shared Information and General Mechanisms for Coordinating with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 7: Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02039 (accessed: 5.04.2022).
19. Huys R. Kolodziej A, Lagarde J. et al. Individual and dyadic rope turning as a window into social coordination. Human Movement Science. 2018; 58:55–68. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.humov.2017.12.015
20. Tatti F., Baud-Bovy G. Force sharing and other collaborative strategies in a dyadic force perception task. PloS One. 2018; 13(2):e0192754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192754
21. Vesper C., Sevdalis V. Informing, coordinating, and performing a perspective on functions of sensorimotor communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2020; 14:168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00168
22. Pezzulo G., Donnarumma F., Dindo H. et al. The body talks: Sensorimotor communication and its brain and kinematic signatures. Physics of Life Reviews, 2019; 28:1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.06.014
23. Ujitoko Y., Kawabe T. Visual estimation of the force applied by another person. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12(1):6216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10243-7.
24. Colley I., Varlet M., Macritchie J., Keller P. The influence of a conductor and co-performer on auditory-motor synchronisation, temporal prediction, and ancillary entrainment in a musical drumming task. Human Movement Science. 2020; 72:102653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102653
25. Timmers R., Macritchie J, Schabrun S. et al. Neural multimodal integration underlying synchronization with a co-performer in music: Influences of motor expertise and visual information. Neuroscience Letters. 2020; 721:134803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134803
26. Field E., Harris D. A comparative survey of the utility of cross-cockpit linkages and autoflight systems’ backfeed to the control inceptors of commercial aircraft’. 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/001401398186216
27. Takagi A., Hirashima M., Nozaki D., Burdet E. Individuals physically interacting in a group rapidly coordinate their movement by estimating the collective goal. eLife. 2019; 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41328
28. Richardson M.J., Marsh K.L., Isenhower R.W. et al. Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science. 2007; 26(6):867–891. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.002
29. Darda K.M., Ramsey R. The inhibition of automatic imitation: a meta-analysis and synthesis of fMRI studies’. bioRxiv. 2019; 334938. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/334938
30. Dignath D., Lotze-Hermes P., Farmer H., Pfister R. Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation. Psychological Research.2018; 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0854-x
31. Safarpour A. EPR: A Theory of Prejudice Reduction and Support for Racial Policies. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10633.31847
32. Genschow O., Cracco E., Verbeke P. et al. Similarity and automatic imitation. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jnf8t
33. Van der Weiden A., Pril D., Dittrich K. et al. How vertical elevation affects self-other integration as measured by the joint Simon effect. Acta Psychologica. 2021; 220:103404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103404
34. Farwaha S., Obhi S. The Effects of Online Status on Self-Other Processing as Revealed by Automatic Imitation. Social Cognition.2021; 39:295–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2021.39.2.295
35. Farwaha S., Obhi S. Socioeconomic status and self-other processing: socioeconomic status predicts interference in the automatic imitation task. Experimental Brain Research. 2020; 238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05761-7
36. Novembre G., Mitsopoulos Z., Keller P. Empathic perspective taking promotes interpersonal coordination through music. Scientific Reports. 2019; 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48556-9
37. Paxton A., Dale R. Argument disrupts interpersonal synchrony. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2013; 66(11):2092–2102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.853089
38. Lumsden J., Miles L.K., Macrae C.N. Sync or sink? Interpersonal synchrony impacts self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ fpsyg.2014.01064 (accessed: 16.06.2022).
39. Fairhurst M.T., Janata P., Keller P.E. Leading the follower: an fMRI investigation of dynamic cooperativity and leader-follower strategies in synchronization with an adaptive virtual partner. NeuroImage. 2014; 84:688–697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.027
40. Chang A., Livingstone S.R., Bosnyak D.J., Trainor L.J. Body sway reflects joint emotional expression in music ensemble performance. Scientific Reports.2019; 9(1):1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1617657114
41. Bieńkiewicz M., Smykovskyi A., Olugbade T. et al. Bridging the gap between emotion and joint action. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews [Preprint]. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.neubiorev.2021.08.014
42. Clayton M., Jakubowski K., Eerola T. et al. Interpersonal Entrainment in Music Performance. Music Perception. 2020; 38:136–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2020.38.2.136
43. Cohen E., Davis A., Taylor J. Interdependence, bonding and support are associated with improved mental wellbeing following an outdoor team challenge. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12351
44. Rauchbauer B., Grosbras M.-H. Developmental trajectory of interpersonal motor alignment: Positive social effects and link to social cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2020; 118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.032
45. Woolhouse M.H., Tidhar D., Cross I. Effects on Inter-Personal Memory of Dancing in Time with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7:167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00167
46. Vitale E., Smith A. Neurobiology of Loneliness, Isolation, and Loss: Integrating Human and Animal Perspectives. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2022; 16:846315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.846315
47. Jackson J.C., Jong J, Bilkey D.et al. Synchrony and Physiological Arousal Increase Cohesion and Cooperation in Large Naturalistic Groups. Scientific Reports. 2018; 8(1):127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18023-4
48. Wilson S., Gos C. Perceiving social cohesion: movement synchrony and task demands both matter. Perception. 2019; 48(4):316–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619837878
49. Cross L., Michael J., Wilsdon L. et al. Still want to help? Interpersonal coordination’s effects on helping behaviour after a 24 hour delay. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 206:103062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103062
50. Tunçgenç B., Cohen E. Interpersonal movement synchrony facilitates pro-social behavior in children’s peer-play. Developmental Science. 2018; 21(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12505
51. Howard E.M., Ropar D., Newport R., Tunçgenç B. Social context facilitates visuomotor synchrony and bonding in children and adults. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11(1):22869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02372-2
52. Crossey B.P., Atherton G., Cross L. Lost in the crowd: Imagining walking in synchrony with a crowd increases affiliation and deindividuation. PloS One. 2021; 16(7):e0254017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254017
53. Lee H., Launay J., Stewart L. Signals through music and dance: Perceived social bonds and formidability on collective movement. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 208:103093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103093
54. Cirelli L.K. How interpersonal synchrony facilitates early prosocial behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2018; 20:35–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.009
55. Nordham C.A., Tognoli E., Fuchs A., Kelso J.A.S. How Interpersonal Coordination Affects Individual Behavior (and Vice Versa): Experimental analysis and adaptive HKB model of social memory. Ecological psychology : a publication of the International Society for Ecological Psychology. 2018; 30(3):224–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2018.1438196
56. Prior N.H. What’s in a moment: what can be learned about pair bonding from studying moment-to-moment behavioral synchrony between partners? Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11:1370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370
57. Анохин П.К. Очерки по физиологии функциональных систем. М.: Книга по требованию, 2021. 450 с. [Anokhin P.K. Ocherki po fiziologii funktsional'nykh sistem [Essays on the physiology of functional systems]. Moscow. Kniga po trebovaniyu Publ. 2021:450. (in Russ.)]
58. Mende M.A., Schmidt H. Psychotherapy in the framework of embodied cognition-does interpersonal synchrony influence therapy success? Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021; 12:562490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.562490
References
1. Harry B., Keller P. Tutorial and simulations with ADAM: an adaptation and anticipation model of sensorimotor synchronization. Biological Cybernetics, 2019; 113. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1007/s00422-019-00798-62. Wahn B., König P. and Kingstone A. Interpersonal coordination in joint multiple object tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 2021; 47(9):1166–1181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000935
3. Curioni A., Vesper C., Knoblich G., Sebanz N. Reciprocal information flow and role distribution support joint action coordination. Cognition. 2019;187:21–31. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.02.006
4. Pecenka N., Engel A., Keller P. Neural correlates of auditory temporal predictions during sensorimotor synchronization. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2013; 7. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00380 (accessed: 26.05.2022).
5. Liebermann-Jordanidis H., Novembre G., Koch I., Keller P. Simultaneous self-other integration and segregation support real-time interpersonal coordination in a musical joint action task. Acta Psychologica, 2021; 218:103348. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103348
6. Fairhurst M., Keller P., Janata P. Distinguishing “self” from “other” in a dynamic synchronization task with an adaptive virtual partner. 2019. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/625061
7. Loehr J.D. The sense of agency in joint action: An integrative review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-021-02051-3
8. Walter J., Buon M, Glaviaux B, Brunel L. Excluded but not alone. Does social exclusion prevent the occurrence of a Joint Simon Effect (JSE)? Acta Psychologica. 2021; 218:103337. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103337
9. Ciardo F., Wykowska A. Response Coordination Emerges in Cooperative but Not Competitive Joint Task. Frontiers in Psychology. 2018; 9:1919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01919
10. Loehr J.D. Shared credit for shared success: Successful joint performance strengthens the sense of joint agency. Consciousness and Cognition. 2018; 66:79–90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.concog.2018.11.001
11. Beaurenaut M., Dezecache G., Grèzes J. Action co-representation under threat: A Social Simon study. Cognition. 2021; 215:104829. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104829
12. van der Weiden A., Porcu E., Liepelt R. Action prediction modulates self-other integration in joint action. Psychological Research [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-022-01674-y
13. Varlet M., Nozaradan S, Nijhuis P, Keller P. Neural tracking and integration of “self” and “other” in improvised interpersonal coordination. NeuroImage. 2019; 206:116303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116303
14. Vesper C, van der Wel RPRD, Knoblich G, Sebanz N. Are you ready to jump? Predictive mechanisms in interpersonal coordination. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance. 2013; 39(1):48–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028066
15. Tidoni E., Candidi M. Commentary: Understanding intentions from actions: Direct perception, inference, and the roles of mirror and mentalizing systems. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2016; 10. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fnbeh.2016.00013 (accessed: 14.06.2022).
16. Schmidt S.N.L., Hass J, Kirsch P, Mier D. The human mirror neuron system-A common neural basis for social cognition? Psychophysiology. 2021; 58(5):e13781. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.13781
17. Chackochan V.T., Sanguineti V. Incomplete information about the partner affects the development of collaborative strategies in joint action. PLoS Computational Biology. 2019; 15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1006385
18. Vesper C., Abramova E, Bütepage J. et al. Joint Action: Mental Representations, Shared Information and General Mechanisms for Coordinating with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2017; 7: Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.02039 (accessed: 5.04.2022).
19. Huys R. Kolodziej A, Lagarde J. et al. Individual and dyadic rope turning as a window into social coordination. Human Movement Science. 2018; 58:55–68. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.humov.2017.12.015
20. Tatti F., Baud-Bovy G. Force sharing and other collaborative strategies in a dyadic force perception task. PloS One. 2018; 13(2):e0192754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0192754
21. Vesper C., Sevdalis V. Informing, coordinating, and performing a perspective on functions of sensorimotor communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2020; 14:168. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2020.00168
22. Pezzulo G., Donnarumma F., Dindo H. et al. The body talks: Sensorimotor communication and its brain and kinematic signatures. Physics of Life Reviews, 2019; 28:1–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plrev.2018.06.014
23. Ujitoko Y., Kawabe T. Visual estimation of the force applied by another person. Scientific Reports. 2022; 12(1):6216. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-10243-7.
24. Colley I., Varlet M., Macritchie J., Keller P. The influence of a conductor and co-performer on auditory-motor synchronisation, temporal prediction, and ancillary entrainment in a musical drumming task. Human Movement Science. 2020; 72:102653. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2020.102653
25. Timmers R., Macritchie J, Schabrun S. et al. Neural multimodal integration underlying synchronization with a co-performer in music: Influences of motor expertise and visual information. Neuroscience Letters. 2020; 721:134803. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neulet.2020.134803
26. Field E., Harris D. A comparative survey of the utility of cross-cockpit linkages and autoflight systems’ backfeed to the control inceptors of commercial aircraft’. 1998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/001401398186216
27. Takagi A., Hirashima M., Nozaki D., Burdet E. Individuals physically interacting in a group rapidly coordinate their movement by estimating the collective goal. eLife. 2019; 8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41328
28. Richardson M.J., Marsh K.L., Isenhower R.W. et al. Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science. 2007; 26(6):867–891. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2007.07.002
29. Darda K.M., Ramsey R. The inhibition of automatic imitation: a meta-analysis and synthesis of fMRI studies’. bioRxiv. 2019; 334938. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1101/334938
30. Dignath D., Lotze-Hermes P., Farmer H., Pfister R. Contingency and contiguity of imitative behaviour affect social affiliation. Psychological Research.2018; 82. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-017-0854-x
31. Safarpour A. EPR: A Theory of Prejudice Reduction and Support for Racial Policies. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.10633.31847
32. Genschow O., Cracco E., Verbeke P. et al. Similarity and automatic imitation. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/jnf8t
33. Van der Weiden A., Pril D., Dittrich K. et al. How vertical elevation affects self-other integration as measured by the joint Simon effect. Acta Psychologica. 2021; 220:103404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103404
34. Farwaha S., Obhi S. The Effects of Online Status on Self-Other Processing as Revealed by Automatic Imitation. Social Cognition.2021; 39:295–314. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2021.39.2.295
35. Farwaha S., Obhi S. Socioeconomic status and self-other processing: socioeconomic status predicts interference in the automatic imitation task. Experimental Brain Research. 2020; 238. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-05761-7
36. Novembre G., Mitsopoulos Z., Keller P. Empathic perspective taking promotes interpersonal coordination through music. Scientific Reports. 2019; 9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-48556-9
37. Paxton A., Dale R. Argument disrupts interpersonal synchrony. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 2013; 66(11):2092–2102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.853089
38. Lumsden J., Miles L.K., Macrae C.N. Sync or sink? Interpersonal synchrony impacts self-esteem. Frontiers in Psychology. 2014; 5. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/ fpsyg.2014.01064 (accessed: 16.06.2022).
39. Fairhurst M.T., Janata P., Keller P.E. Leading the follower: an fMRI investigation of dynamic cooperativity and leader-follower strategies in synchronization with an adaptive virtual partner. NeuroImage. 2014; 84:688–697. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.09.027
40. Chang A., Livingstone S.R., Bosnyak D.J., Trainor L.J. Body sway reflects joint emotional expression in music ensemble performance. Scientific Reports.2019; 9(1):1–11. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1073/pnas.1617657114
41. Bieńkiewicz M., Smykovskyi A., Olugbade T. et al. Bridging the gap between emotion and joint action. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews [Preprint]. 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.neubiorev.2021.08.014
42. Clayton M., Jakubowski K., Eerola T. et al. Interpersonal Entrainment in Music Performance. Music Perception. 2020; 38:136–194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1525/mp.2020.38.2.136
43. Cohen E., Davis A., Taylor J. Interdependence, bonding and support are associated with improved mental wellbeing following an outdoor team challenge. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being [Preprint]. 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/aphw.12351
44. Rauchbauer B., Grosbras M.-H. Developmental trajectory of interpersonal motor alignment: Positive social effects and link to social cognition. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 2020; 118. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.07.032
45. Woolhouse M.H., Tidhar D., Cross I. Effects on Inter-Personal Memory of Dancing in Time with Others. Frontiers in Psychology. 2016; 7:167. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00167
46. Vitale E., Smith A. Neurobiology of Loneliness, Isolation, and Loss: Integrating Human and Animal Perspectives. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience. 2022; 16:846315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2022.846315
47. Jackson J.C., Jong J, Bilkey D.et al. Synchrony and Physiological Arousal Increase Cohesion and Cooperation in Large Naturalistic Groups. Scientific Reports. 2018; 8(1):127. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18023-4
48. Wilson S., Gos C. Perceiving social cohesion: movement synchrony and task demands both matter. Perception. 2019; 48(4):316–329. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619837878
49. Cross L., Michael J., Wilsdon L. et al. Still want to help? Interpersonal coordination’s effects on helping behaviour after a 24 hour delay. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 206:103062. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103062
50. Tunçgenç B., Cohen E. Interpersonal movement synchrony facilitates pro-social behavior in children’s peer-play. Developmental Science. 2018; 21(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12505
51. Howard E.M., Ropar D., Newport R., Tunçgenç B. Social context facilitates visuomotor synchrony and bonding in children and adults. Scientific Reports. 2021; 11(1):22869. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02372-2
52. Crossey B.P., Atherton G., Cross L. Lost in the crowd: Imagining walking in synchrony with a crowd increases affiliation and deindividuation. PloS One. 2021; 16(7):e0254017. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254017
53. Lee H., Launay J., Stewart L. Signals through music and dance: Perceived social bonds and formidability on collective movement. Acta Psychologica. 2020; 208:103093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103093
54. Cirelli L.K. How interpersonal synchrony facilitates early prosocial behavior. Current Opinion in Psychology. 2018; 20:35–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.009
55. Nordham C.A., Tognoli E., Fuchs A., Kelso J.A.S. How Interpersonal Coordination Affects Individual Behavior (and Vice Versa): Experimental analysis and adaptive HKB model of social memory. Ecological psychology : a publication of the International Society for Ecological Psychology. 2018; 30(3):224–249. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2018.1438196
56. Prior N.H. What’s in a moment: what can be learned about pair bonding from studying moment-to-moment behavioral synchrony between partners? Frontiers in Psychology. 2020; 11:1370. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01370
57. Анохин П.К. Очерки по физиологии функциональных систем. М.: Книга по требованию, 2021. 450 с. [Anokhin P.K. Ocherki po fiziologii funktsional'nykh sistem [Essays on the physiology of functional systems]. Moscow. Kniga po trebovaniyu Publ. 2021:450. (in Russ.)]
58. Mende M.A., Schmidt H. Psychotherapy in the framework of embodied cognition-does interpersonal synchrony influence therapy success? Frontiers in Psychiatry. 2021; 12:562490. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.562490
Опубликован
2022-09-29
Как цитировать
Меськова, Е., Муртазина, Е., & Гинзбург-Шик, Ю. (2022). Межличностная координация: системные аспекты и социально-психофизиологические факторы (обзор). Психология. Психофизиология, 15(3), 90-102. https://doi.org/10.14529/jpps220309
Выпуск
Раздел
Психофизиология
Copyright (c) 2022 Психология. Психофизиология
Это произведение доступно по лицензии Creative Commons «Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives» («Атрибуция — Некоммерческое использование — Без производных произведений») 4.0 Всемирная.
