↓ Skip to main content

Imitation by social interaction? Analysis of a minimal agent-based model of the correspondence problem

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
11 X users

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Imitation by social interaction? Analysis of a minimal agent-based model of the correspondence problem
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00202
Pubmed ID
Authors

Tom Froese, Charles Lenay, Takashi Ikegami

Abstract

One of the major challenges faced by explanations of imitation is the "correspondence problem": how is an agent able to match its bodily expression to the observed bodily expression of another agent, especially when there is no possibility of external self-observation? Current theories only consider the possibility of an innate or acquired matching mechanism belonging to an isolated individual. In this paper we evaluate an alternative that situates the explanation of imitation in the inter-individual dynamics of the interaction process itself. We implemented a minimal model of two interacting agents based on a recent psychological study of imitative behavior during minimalist perceptual crossing. The agents cannot sense the configuration of their own body, and do not have access to other's body configuration, either. And yet surprisingly they are still capable of converging on matching bodily configurations. Analysis revealed that the agents solved this version of the correspondence problem in terms of collective properties of the interaction process. Contrary to the assumption that such properties merely serve as external input or scaffolding for individual mechanisms, it was found that the behavioral dynamics were distributed across the model as a whole.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 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 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
Germany 2 4%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
Unknown 49 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 20%
Student > Master 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 9%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 9%
Other 12 22%
Unknown 2 4%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 33%
Computer Science 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 9%
Social Sciences 4 7%
Philosophy 3 5%
Other 16 29%
Unknown 3 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 31 May 2021.
All research outputs
#4,341,674
of 24,694,993 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#1,916
of 7,533 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#35,309
of 253,559 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#101
of 292 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,694,993 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,533 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 253,559 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 292 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 65% of its contemporaries.