Abstract
There are laboratory and field experiments for approaches to joint action. We have to study interpersonal information-processing in joint action according to the merits and demerits in field and laboratory experiments. Emergent and planned coordination is separately studied so far. But human actions are not clearly divided by emergent and planned coordination. Thus, it may be necessary to recognize hybrid forms of coordination which are part emergent, part planned. In future studies, we will examine three experiments as follows: first, pairs of participants make complementary and synchronous force production exclusively when the target force shared by the participants and the total force produced by them are presented visually. This innovative finding suggests that two participants represent the target force shared by them in their brain. Thus, we have to find a behavioral indicator as the representation of the action target shared by two participants. Second, focusing a target of our study to a task of force production, we have to examine effects of different combinations of types of force production (continuous, periodic, or discrete force production) and target force (relative or absolute value) on the two-heads-better-than-one effect. Third, we have to examine a hypothesis (social loafing) that an increase in the number of participants in joint action resulted in a decrease in individual contribution.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Bahrami B, Olsen K, Latham PE, Roepstorff A, Rees G, Frith CD (2010) Optimally interacting minds. Science 329:1081–1085
Bosga J, Meulenbroek RG (2007) Joint-action coordination of redundant force contributions in a virtual lifting task. Mot Control 11:235–258
Butterfill SA (2018) Coordinating joint action. In: Ludwig K (ed) The Routledge handbook on collective intentionality. Routledge, London, pp 68–82
Czyz SH, Szmajke A, Kruger A, Kuber M (2016) Participation in team sports can eliminate the effect of social loafing. Percept Mot Skills 123:754–768
Ganesh G, Takagi A, Osu R, Yoshioka T, Kawato M, Burdet E (2014) Two is better than one: physical interactions improve motor performance in humans. Sci Rep 4:3824
Ingham AG, Levinger G, Graves J, Peckham V (1974) The Ringelmann effect: studies of group size and group performance. J Exp Soc Psychol 10:371–384
Karau SJ, Williams KD (1993) Social loafing: a meta-analytic review and theoretical integration. J Pers Soc Psychol 65:681–706
Kijima A, Kadota K, Yokoyama K, Okumura M, Suzuki H, Schmidt RC, Yamamoto Y (2012) Switching dynamics in an interpersonal competition brings about “deadlock” synchronization of players. PLoS One 7:e47911
Knoblich G, Butterfill S, Sebanz N (2011) Psychological research on joint action: theory and data. In: Ross B (ed) The psychology of learning and motivation, vol 54. Academic, Burlington, pp 59–101
Koriat A (2012) When are two heads better than one and why? Science 336:360–362
Kravitz DA, Martin B (1986) Ringelmann rediscovered: the original article. J Pers Soc Psychol 50:936–941
Latané B, Williams K, Harkins S (1979) Many hands make light the work: the causes and consequences of social loafing. J Pers Soc Psychol 37:822–832
Loehr DJ, Vesper C (2016) The sound of you and me: novices represent shared goals in joint action. Quart J Exp Psychol 69:536–547
Masumoto J, Inui N (2013) Two heads are better then one: both complementary and synchronous strategies facilitate joint action. J Neurophysiol 109:1307–1314
Masumoto J, Inui N (2017) A common force-sharing pattern in joint action that consists of four people. J Mot Behav: 1–11 (published online)
Newman-Norlund RD, van Schie HT, van Zuijlen AMJ, Bekkering H (2007) The mirror neuron system is more active during complementary compared with imitative action. Nat Neurosci 10:817–818
Newman-Norlund RD, Bosga J, Meulenbroek RG, Bekkering H (2008) Anatomical substrates of cooperative joint-action in a continuous motor task: virtual lifting and balancing. NeuroImage 41:169–177
Okumura M, Kijima A, Kadota K, Yokoyama K, Suzuki H, Yamamoto Y (2012) A critical interpersonal distance switches between two coordination modes in kendo matches. PLoS One 7:e51877
Passos P, Milho J, Fonseca S, Borges J, Araújo D, Davids K (2011) Interpersonal distance regulates functional grouping tendencies of agents in team sports. J Mot Behav 43:155–163
Rizzolatti G, Craighero L (2004) The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci 27:169–192
Silva P, Duarte R, Sampaio J, Aguiar P, Davids K, Araújo D, Garganta J (2014) Field dimension and skill level constrain team tactical behaviors in small-sided and conditioned games in football. J Sports Sci 32:1888–1896
Yamamoto Y, Yokoyama K (2011) Common and unique network dynamics in football games. PLoS One 6:e29638
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Inui, N. (2018). Conclusion. In: Interpersonal Coordination. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1765-1_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1765-1_7
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-13-1764-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-13-1765-1
eBook Packages: Biomedical and Life SciencesBiomedical and Life Sciences (R0)