Time course analyses confirm independence of imitative and spatial compatibility.
Tools
Tools
Tools
Catmur, C and Heyes, C (2011) Time course analyses confirm independence of imitative and spatial compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37 (2). pp. 409-421.
![[img]](http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/style/images/fileicons/text.png)
|
Text
Time course analyses confirm independence of imitative and spatial compatibility_CatmurHeyes2011.pdf - Accepted version Manuscript Available under License : See the attached licence file. Download (3MB) |
|
|
Text (licence)
licence.txt Download (1kB) |
Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0019325
Abstract
Imitative compatibility, or automatic imitation, has been used as a measure of imitative performance and as a behavioral index of the functioning of the human mirror system (e.g., Brass, Bekkering, Wohlschlager, & Prinz, 2000; Heyes, Bird, Johnson, & Haggard, 2005; Kilner, Paulignan, & Blakemore, 2003). However, the use of imitative compatibility as a measure of imitation has been criticized on the grounds that imitative compatibility has been confounded with simple spatial compatibility (Aicken, Wilson, Williams, & Mon-Williams, 2007; Bertenthal, Longo, & Kosobud, 2006; Jansson, Wilson, Williams, & Mon-Williams, 2007). Two experiments are reported in which, in contrast with previous studies, imitative compatibility was measured on both spatially compatible and spatially incompatible trials, and imitative compatibility was shown to be present regardless of spatial compatibility. Additional features of the experiments allowed measurement of the time courses of the imitative and spatial compatibility effects both within and across trials. It was found that imitative compatibility follows a different time course from spatial compatibility, providing further evidence for their independence and supporting the use of imitative compatibility as a measure of imitation.
| Item Type: | Article | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Divisions : | Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences > School of Psychology | |||||||||
| Authors : |
|
|||||||||
| Date : | April 2011 | |||||||||
| DOI : | 10.1037/a0019325 | |||||||||
| Related URLs : | ||||||||||
| Additional Information : | NOTICE: this is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37 (2), April 2011, DOI 10.1037/a0019325. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. | |||||||||
| Depositing User : | Symplectic Elements | |||||||||
| Date Deposited : | 01 Dec 2011 15:25 | |||||||||
| Last Modified : | 31 Oct 2017 14:15 | |||||||||
| URI: | http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/id/eprint/25588 |
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year