Actions Speak Louder Than Words
Title: Actions speak louder than words: comparing automatic imitation and verbal command
Authors: Helge Gillmeister, Arnaud Badets and Cecilia Heyes University College London, London, UK
Corresponding author: Helge Gillmeister Department of Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AP, United Kingdom Tel.: +44 207 679 5379 E-mail: h.gillmeister@ucl.ac.uk
Running head: Actions speak louder than words
Word count: 3904
Actions speak louder than words
Abstract
Automatic imitation – copying observed actions without intention – is known to occur, not only in neurological patients and those with developmental disorders, but also in healthy, typically-developing adults and children. Previous research has shown that a variety of actions are automatically imitated, and that automatic imitation promotes social affiliation and rapport. We assessed the power of automatic imitation by comparing it with the strength of the tendency to obey verbal commands. In a Stroop interference paradigm, the stimuli were compatible, incompatible and neutral compounds of hand postures and verbal commands. When imitative responses were required, the impact of irrelevant action images on responding to words was greater than the effect of irrelevant words on responding to actions. Control group performance showed that this asymmetry was not due to modality effects or differential salience of action and word stimuli. These results indicate that automatic imitation was more powerful than verbal command.
1
Actions speak louder than words
Introduction
Even when we do not intend to imitate others, we are inclined to copy their body movements. This tendency, known as ‘mimicry’ or ‘automatic imitation’, was once thought to be confined to patients with frontal brain damage (Lhermitte, Pillon, & Serdaru, 1986), atypically-developing individuals (e.g. Charman & Baron-Cohen, 1994), ‘savages’ (Darwin, 1989) and nonhuman animals (Thorndike, 1898).
Authors: Helge Gillmeister, Arnaud Badets and Cecilia Heyes University College London, London, UK
Corresponding author: Helge Gillmeister Department of Psychology, University College London, 26 Bedford Way, London WC1H 0AP, United Kingdom Tel.: +44 207 679 5379 E-mail: h.gillmeister@ucl.ac.uk
Running head: Actions speak louder than words
Word count: 3904
Actions speak louder than words
Abstract
Automatic imitation – copying observed actions without intention – is known to occur, not only in neurological patients and those with developmental disorders, but also in healthy, typically-developing adults and children. Previous research has shown that a variety of actions are automatically imitated, and that automatic imitation promotes social affiliation and rapport. We assessed the power of automatic imitation by comparing it with the strength of the tendency to obey verbal commands. In a Stroop interference paradigm, the stimuli were compatible, incompatible and neutral compounds of hand postures and verbal commands. When imitative responses were required, the impact of irrelevant action images on responding to words was greater than the effect of irrelevant words on responding to actions. Control group performance showed that this asymmetry was not due to modality effects or differential salience of action and word stimuli. These results indicate that automatic imitation was more powerful than verbal command.
1
Actions speak louder than words
Introduction
Even when we do not intend to imitate others, we are inclined to copy their body movements. This tendency, known as ‘mimicry’ or ‘automatic imitation’, was once thought to be confined to patients with frontal brain damage (Lhermitte, Pillon, & Serdaru, 1986), atypically-developing individuals (e.g. Charman & Baron-Cohen, 1994), ‘savages’ (Darwin, 1989) and nonhuman animals (Thorndike, 1898).
References: Bertenthal, B.I., Longo, M.R., & Kosobud, A. (2006). Imitative response tendencies following observation of intransitive actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 210–225. Brass, M., Bekkering, H., Wohlschläger, A., & Prinz, W. (2000). Compatibility between observed and executed finger movements: comparing symbolic, spatial, and imitative cues. Brain and Cognition, 44, 124-43. Charman, T., & Baron-Cohen, S. (1994). Another look at imitation in autism. Development and Psychopathology, 6, 403-413. Darwin, C. (1989). Voyage of the Beagle. London: Penguin Books. Heyes, C.M., & Ray, E.D. (2000). What is the significance of imitation in animals? Advances in the Study of Behavior, 29, 215–245. Heyes, C.M., Bird, G., Johnson, H., & Haggard, P. (2005). Experience modulates automatic imitation. Cognitive Brain Research, 22, 233-240. Kilner, J.M., Paulignan, Y., & Blakemore, S.J. (2003). An interference effect of observed biological movement on action. Current Biology, 13, 522–525. Lakin, J.L., & Chartrand, T.L. (2003). Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science, 14, 334-339. Lhermitte, F., Pillon, B., & Serdaru, N. (1986). Human autonomy and the frontal lobes. Part I: Imitation and utilization behavior: a neuropsychological study of 75 patients. Annals of Neurology, 19, 326-334. Meltzoff, A. N. & Moore, M. K. (1997). Explaining facial imitation: A theoretical model. Early Development and Parenting, 6, 179-192. Ratcliff, R. (1979). Group reaction time distributions and an analysis of distribution statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446–461. Simpson, A. & Riggs, K.J. (2007). Under what conditions do young children have difficulty inhibiting manual actions? Developmental Psychology, 43, 417-428. Strafella, A.P. & Paus, T. (2000). Modulation of cortical excitability during action observation: a transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Neuroreport, 11, 22892292. Stürmer, B., Aschersleben, G., & Prinz, W. (2000). Correspondence effects with manual gestures and postures: a study of imitation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 1746-1759. Tagliabue, M., Zorzi, M., Umilta, C., & Bassignani, F. (2000). The role of longterm-memory and short-term-memory links in the Simon effect. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 26, 648-670. Thorndike, E.L. (1898). Animal Intelligence: An Experimental Study of the Associative Processes in Animals (Psychological Review, Monograph Supplements, No. 8). New York: Macmillan. Wallbott, H.G. (1991). Recognition of emotion from facial expression via imitation? Some indirect evidence for an old theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 30, 207-219.