Limits...
Individual differences in reading social intentions from motor deviants.

Lewkowicz D, Quesque F, Coello Y, Delevoye-Turrell YN - Front Psychol (2015)

Bottom Line: Video clips were sliced and normalized to control for either the reaction times (RTs) or/and the movement times (MTs) of the grasping action.Tested in a second group of participants, results showed that the detection of social intention relies on the variation of both RT and MT that are implicitly perceived in the grasping action.The ability to use implicitly these motor deviants for action-outcome understanding would be the key to intuitive social interaction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: SCALab, UMR CNRS 9193, Department of Psychology, Université de Lille , Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France.

ABSTRACT
As social animals, it is crucial to understand others' intention. But is it possible to detect social intention in two actions that have the exact same motor goal? In the present study, we presented participants with video clips of an individual reaching for and grasping an object to either use it (personal trial) or to give his partner the opportunity to use it (social trial). In Experiment 1, the ability of naïve participants to classify correctly social trials through simple observation of short video clips was tested. In addition, detection levels were analyzed as a function of individual scores in psychological questionnaires of motor imagery, visual imagery, and social cognition. Results revealed that the between-participant heterogeneity in the ability to distinguish social from personal actions was predicted by the social skill abilities. A second experiment was then conducted to assess what predictive mechanism could contribute to the detection of social intention. Video clips were sliced and normalized to control for either the reaction times (RTs) or/and the movement times (MTs) of the grasping action. Tested in a second group of participants, results showed that the detection of social intention relies on the variation of both RT and MT that are implicitly perceived in the grasping action. The ability to use implicitly these motor deviants for action-outcome understanding would be the key to intuitive social interaction.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Graphical illustration of the correlation parameters that were obtained in Experiment 1 between the individual scores of the Read the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME-test), and the percentage of correct answers given in the categorization task. Black dots and white dots represent female and male participants, respectively.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538241&req=5

Figure 3: Graphical illustration of the correlation parameters that were obtained in Experiment 1 between the individual scores of the Read the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME-test), and the percentage of correct answers given in the categorization task. Black dots and white dots represent female and male participants, respectively.

Mentions: On average, participants obtained a score of M = 5.8, SD = 1.2 in visual imagery and M = 4.8, SD = 1.3 in kinesthetic imagery as assessed by the Movement Imagery Questionnaire. The results revealed an absence of correlation with the percentage of correct categorization for both the visual imagery score (R = 0.125, p = 0.551) and the kinesthetic imagery score (R = 0.194, p = 0.354). The results of the RME-test revealed a mean score of 28.24, SD = 3.5. Our results showed that the RME-test scores were positively correlated with the percentage of correct categorization (R = 0.677, p < 0.001), indicating that a higher score in the RME is associated to a higher performance in the categorization task (see Figure 3). Concerning the degree of relationship between the questionnaires, the RME-test scores were related neither to the kinesthetic imagery scores (R = 0.006, p = 0.975) nor to the visual imagery scores (R = 0.278, p = 0.178). Finally, the scores on the two dimensions of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire were not correlated (R = 0.132, p = 0.527).


Individual differences in reading social intentions from motor deviants.

Lewkowicz D, Quesque F, Coello Y, Delevoye-Turrell YN - Front Psychol (2015)

Graphical illustration of the correlation parameters that were obtained in Experiment 1 between the individual scores of the Read the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME-test), and the percentage of correct answers given in the categorization task. Black dots and white dots represent female and male participants, respectively.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4538241&req=5

Figure 3: Graphical illustration of the correlation parameters that were obtained in Experiment 1 between the individual scores of the Read the Mind in the Eyes Test (RME-test), and the percentage of correct answers given in the categorization task. Black dots and white dots represent female and male participants, respectively.
Mentions: On average, participants obtained a score of M = 5.8, SD = 1.2 in visual imagery and M = 4.8, SD = 1.3 in kinesthetic imagery as assessed by the Movement Imagery Questionnaire. The results revealed an absence of correlation with the percentage of correct categorization for both the visual imagery score (R = 0.125, p = 0.551) and the kinesthetic imagery score (R = 0.194, p = 0.354). The results of the RME-test revealed a mean score of 28.24, SD = 3.5. Our results showed that the RME-test scores were positively correlated with the percentage of correct categorization (R = 0.677, p < 0.001), indicating that a higher score in the RME is associated to a higher performance in the categorization task (see Figure 3). Concerning the degree of relationship between the questionnaires, the RME-test scores were related neither to the kinesthetic imagery scores (R = 0.006, p = 0.975) nor to the visual imagery scores (R = 0.278, p = 0.178). Finally, the scores on the two dimensions of the Movement Imagery Questionnaire were not correlated (R = 0.132, p = 0.527).

Bottom Line: Video clips were sliced and normalized to control for either the reaction times (RTs) or/and the movement times (MTs) of the grasping action.Tested in a second group of participants, results showed that the detection of social intention relies on the variation of both RT and MT that are implicitly perceived in the grasping action.The ability to use implicitly these motor deviants for action-outcome understanding would be the key to intuitive social interaction.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: SCALab, UMR CNRS 9193, Department of Psychology, Université de Lille , Villeneuve-d'Ascq, France.

ABSTRACT
As social animals, it is crucial to understand others' intention. But is it possible to detect social intention in two actions that have the exact same motor goal? In the present study, we presented participants with video clips of an individual reaching for and grasping an object to either use it (personal trial) or to give his partner the opportunity to use it (social trial). In Experiment 1, the ability of naïve participants to classify correctly social trials through simple observation of short video clips was tested. In addition, detection levels were analyzed as a function of individual scores in psychological questionnaires of motor imagery, visual imagery, and social cognition. Results revealed that the between-participant heterogeneity in the ability to distinguish social from personal actions was predicted by the social skill abilities. A second experiment was then conducted to assess what predictive mechanism could contribute to the detection of social intention. Video clips were sliced and normalized to control for either the reaction times (RTs) or/and the movement times (MTs) of the grasping action. Tested in a second group of participants, results showed that the detection of social intention relies on the variation of both RT and MT that are implicitly perceived in the grasping action. The ability to use implicitly these motor deviants for action-outcome understanding would be the key to intuitive social interaction.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus