↓ Skip to main content

A kinematic examination of dual-route processing for action imitation

Overview of attention for article published in Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
A kinematic examination of dual-route processing for action imitation
Published in
Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, August 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13414-018-1582-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Arran T. Reader, Vaisnavi M. Rao, Anastasia Christakou, Nicholas P. Holmes

Abstract

The dual-route model of imitation suggests that meaningful and meaningless actions are processed through either an indirect or a direct route, respectively. Evidence indicates that the direct route is more cognitively demanding since it relies on mapping visuospatial properties of the observed action on to a performed one. These cognitive demands might negatively influence reaction time and accuracy for actions performed following a meaningless action under time constraints. However, how meaningful and meaningless action imitation processing is reflected in movement kinematics is not yet clear. We wanted to confirm whether meaningless action performance incurs a reaction time cost, whether the cost is reflected in kinematics, and, more generally, to examine kinematic markers of emblematic meaningful and meaningless action imitation. We examined participants' reaction time and wrist movements when they imitated emblematic meaningful or matched meaningless gestures in either blocks of the same action type or mixed blocks. Meaningless actions were associated with a greater correction period at the end of the movement, possibly reflecting a strategy designed to ensure accurate completion for less familiar actions under time constraints. Furthermore, in mixed blocks, trials following meaningless actions had a significantly increased reaction time, supporting previous claims that route selection for action imitation may be stimulus-driven. However, there was only convincing evidence for this effect with an interval of ~2,948ms, but not ~3,573ms or ~2,553ms, between movements. Future work motion-tracking the entire hand to assess imitation accuracy, and more closely examining the influence of duration between movements, may help to explain these effects.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 25%
Student > Master 3 19%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Lecturer 1 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 6%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 3 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 50%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 6%
Neuroscience 1 6%
Design 1 6%
Unknown 5 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 April 2021.
All research outputs
#15,250,694
of 24,980,180 outputs
Outputs from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#661
of 1,802 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#182,517
of 336,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics
#9
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,980,180 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,802 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 336,801 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.