Hand to mouth: Automatic imitation across effector systems

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 36, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 1174-1183

  Leighton, Jane ^a   Heyes, Cecilia ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b ALL SOULS COLLEGE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Associative sequence learning (ASL); Automatic imitation; Effector; Mirror neuron

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; ATTENTION; AUTOMATISM; BEHAVIOR; COLOR VISION; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMITATION; LEARNING; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

ADULT; ASSOCIATION LEARNING; ATTENTION; AUTOMATISM; COLOR PERCEPTION; CUES; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMITATIVE BEHAVIOR; INTENTION; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; PSYCHOMOTOR PERFORMANCE; REACTION TIME;

EID: 77957345410     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0019953     Document Type: Article

References (69)

1. Anisfeld M. Neonatal imitation: Review. Developmental Review 1991, 11:60-97.
2. Anisfeld M. Only tongue protrusion modeling is matched by neonates. Developmental Review 1996, 16:149-161.
3. Aziz-Zadeh L., Maeda F., Zaidel E., Mazziotta J., Iacoboni M. Lateralisation in motor facilitation during action observation: A TMS study. Experimental Brain Research 2002, 144:127-131.
4. Bach P., Tipper S.P. Implicit action encoding influences personal-trait judgments. Cognition 2007, 102:151-178.
5. Berger S.M., Hadley S.W. Some effects of a model's performance on an observer's electromyographic activity. American Journal of Psychology 1975, 88:263-276.
6. Bertenthal B.I., Longo M.R., Kosobud A. Imitative response tendencies following observation of intransitive actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2006, 32:210-225.
7. Bird G., Brindley R., Leighton J., Heyes C.M. General processes, rather than 'goals,' explain imitation errors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2007, 33:1158-1169.
8. Brass M., Bekkering H., Wohlschlager A., Prinz W. Compatibility between observed and executed finger movements: Comparing symbolic, spatial, and imitative cues. Brain and Cognition 2000, 44:124-143.
9. Brass M., Heyes C.M. Imitation: Is cognitive neuroscience solving the correspondence problem?. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2005, 9:489-495.
10. Buccino G., Binkofski F., Fink G.R., Fadiga L., Fogassi L., Gallese V., Freund H.J. Action observation activates premotor and parietal areas in a somatotopic manner: An fMRI study. European Journal of Neuroscience 2001, 13:400-404.
11. Calvo-Merino B., Glaser D.E., Grezes J., Passingham R.E., Haggard P. Action observation and acquired motor skills: An fMRI study with expert dancers. Cerebral Cortex 2005, 15:1243-1249.
12. Catmur C., Gillmeister H., Bird G., Liepelt R., Brass M., Heyes C. Through the looking glass: Counter-mirror activation following incompatible sensorimotor learning. European Journal of Neuroscience 2008, 28(6):1208-1215.
13. Catmur C., Walsh V., Heyes C.M. Sensorimotor learning configures the human mirror system. Current Biology 2007, 17:1527-1531.
14. Chartrand T.L., Bargh J.A. The chameleon effect: The perception-behaviour link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1999, 76:893-910.
15. Craighero L., Fadiga L., Rizzolatti G., Umilta C. Visuomotor priming. Visual Cognition 1998, 5:109-125.
16. Cross E.S., Hamilton A.F.C., Grafton S.T. Building a motor simulation de novo: Observation of dance by dancers. NeuroImage 2006, 31:1257-1267.
17. Elsner B., Hommel B. Effect anticipation and action control. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2001, 27:229-240.
18. Elsner B., Hommel B. Contiguity and contingency in action-effect learning. Psychological Research 2004, 68:138-154.
19. Fadiga L., Fogassi L., Pavesi G., Rizzolatti G. Motor facilitation during action observation: A magnetic stimulation study. Journal of Neurophysiology 1995, 73:2608-2611.
20. Ferrari P.F., Rozzi S., Fogassi L. Mirror neurons responding to observation of actions made with tools in monkey ventral premotor cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2005, 17:212-226.
21. Franz E.A., Ford S., Werner S. Brain and cognitive processes of imitation in bimanual situations: Making inferences about mirror neuron systems. Brain Research 2007, 11:138-149.
22. Gallese V., Fadiga L., Fogassi L., Rizzolatti G. Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain 1996, 119:593-609.
23. Gillmeister, H., Catmur, C., Brass, M., & Heyes, C. M. (2010). Experience-based priming of body parts: A study of imitation and the mirror system. Unpublished manuscript.
24. Greenwald A.G. Sensory feedback mechanisms in performance control: With special reference to the ideo-motor mechanism. Psychological Review 1970, 77:73-99.
25. Head H. Aphasia and kindred disorders of speech. Brain 1920, 43:87-165.
26. Heyes C. Causes and consequences of imitation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2001, 5:253-261.
27. Heyes C.M. Where do mirror neurons come from?. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews 2010, 34:575-583.
28. Heyes C.M. Imitation by association. Perspectives on imitation: From Neuroscience to social science 2005, 157-176. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. S. Hurley, N. Chater (Eds.).
29. Heyes C.M., Bird G., Johnson H., Haggard P. Experience modulates automatic imitation. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 22:233-240.
30. Heyes C.M., Ray E. What is the significance of imitation in animals?. Advances in the Study of Behavior 2000, 29:215-245.
31. Heyes C.M., Ray E.D. Spatial S-R compatibility effects in an intentional imitation task. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2004, 11:703-705.
32. Hommel B. The relationship between stimulus processing and response selection in the Simon task: Evidence for a temporal overlap. Psychological Research 1993, 55:280-290.
33. Hommel B. Stimulus-response compatibility and the Simon effect: Toward an empirical clarification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1995, 21:764-775.
34. Hommel B. Toward an action-concept model of stimulus-response compatibility. Theoretical issues in stimulus-response compatibility 1997, 281-330. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. B. Hommel, W. Prinz (Eds.).
35. Hommel B., Musseler J., Aschersleben G., Prinz W. The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2001, 24:849-878.
36. Iacoboni M., Woods R.P., Brass M., Bekkering H., Mazziota J.C., Rizzolatti G. Cortical mechanisms of human imitation. Science 1999, 286:2526-2528.
37. Jones S.S. Imitation or exploration? Young infants' matching of adults' oral gestures. Child Development 1996, 67:1952-1969.
38. Jones S.S. Newborn imitation or arousal? The effect of music on four-week-old infants' tongue protrusions. Infant Behavior and Development 2006, 29:126-130.
39. Kerzel D., Bekkering H. Motor activation from visible speech: Evidence from stimulus-response compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2000, 26:634-647.
40. Keysers C., Kohler E., Umilta M.A., Nanetti L., Fogassi L., Gallese V. Audiovisual mirror neurons and action recognition. Experimental Brain Research 2003, 153:628-636.
41. Keysers C., Perrett D.I. Demystifying social cognition: A Hebbian perspective. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2004, 8:501-507.
42. Kilner J.M., Paulignan Y., Blakemore S.J. An interference effect of observed biological movement on action. Current Biology 2003, 13:522-525.
43. Kornblum S. Dimensional overlap and dimensional relevance in stimulus-response and stimulus-stimulus compatibility. Tutorials in motor behavior II 1992, 743-777. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. G.E. Stelmach, J. Requin (Eds.).
44. Kornblum S. The way irrelevant dimensions are processed depends on what they overlap with: The case of Stroop and Simon-like stimuli. Psychological Research 1994, 56:130-135.
45. Kornblum S., Hasbroucq T., Osman A. Dimensional overlap: Cognitive basis for stimulus response compatibility-A model and taxonomy. Psychological Review 1990, 97:253-270.
46. Lakin J.L., Chartrand T.L. Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science 2003, 14(4):334-339.
47. Lu C.-H., Proctor R.W. The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 1995, 2:174-207.
48. Meltzoff A.N., Moore M.K. Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates. Science 1977, 198:75-78.
49. Meltzoff A.N., Moore M.K. Newborn infants imitate adult facial gestures. Child Development 1983, 54:702-709.
50. Meltzoff A.N., Moore M.K. Imitation in newborn infants: Exploring the range of gestures imitated and the underlying mechanisms. Developmental Psychology 1989, 25:954-962.
51. Meltzoff A.N., Moore M.K. Explaining facial imitation: A theoretical model. Early Development and Parenting 1997, 6:179-192.
52. Pearce J.M. A model of stimulus generalization for Pavlovian conditioning. Psychological Review 1987, 94:61-73.
53. Pearce J.M. Similarity and discrimination: A selective review and a connectionist model. Psychological Review 1994, 101:587-607.
54. Press C., Bird G., Flach R., Heyes C.M. Robotic movement elicits automatic imitation. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 25:632-640.
55. Press C., Bird G., Walsh E., Heyes C.M. Are intransitive actions automatically imitated?. Brain & Cognition 2008, 67:44-50.
56. Press C., Gillmeister H., Heyes C.M. Bottom-up, not top-down, modulation of imitation by human and robotic models. European Journal of Neuroscience 2006, 24:2415-2419.
57. Prinz W. Perception and action planning. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology 1997, 9:129-154.
58. Prinz W. Experimental approaches to imitation. The imitative mind: Development, evolution, and brain bases 2002, 143-163. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England. A.N. Meltzoff, W. Prinz (Eds.).
59. Rizzolatti G., Fadiga L., Gallese V., Fogassi L. Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive Brain Research 1996, 3:131-141.
60. Stanley, J., Gowen, E., & Miall, R. C. (in press). Effects of agency on movement interference during observation of a moving dot stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance.
61. Stürmer B., Aschersleben G., Prinz W. Effects of correspondence between complex stimulus and response patterns. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2000, 26:1746-1759.
62. Strafella A.P., Paus T. Modulation of cortical excitability during action observation: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Neuroreport 2000, 11:2289-2292.
63. Tomasello M. Do apes ape?. Social learning in animals: The roots of culture 1996, 319-346. Academic Press, San Diego, CA. C.M. Heyes, B.G. Galef (Eds.).
64. Ullstadius E. Neonatal imitation in a mother-infant setting. Early Development and Parenting 1998, 7:1-8.
65. Wapner S., Cirillo L. Imitation of a model's hand movements: Age changes in transposition of left-right relations. Child Development 1968, 39:887-894.
66. Watkins K.E., Strafella A.P., Paus T. Seeing and hearing speech excites the motor system involved in speech production. Neuropsychologia 2003, 41:989-994.
67. Wheaton K., Pipingas A., Silberstein R., Puce A. Human neural responses elicited to observing the actions of others. Visual Neuroscience 2001, 18:401-406.
68. Wheaton K.J., Thompson J.C., Syngeniotis A., Abbott D.F., Puce A. Viewing the motion of human body parts activates different regions of premotor, temporal, and parietal cortex. NeuroImage 2004, 22:277-288.
69. Wohlschläger A., Gattis M., Bekkering H. Action generation and action perception in imitation: An instance of the ideomotor principle. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 2003, 358(1431):501-515.