↓ Skip to main content

When mirroring is both simple and “smart”: how mimicry can be embodied, adaptive, and non-representational

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
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 (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (88th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
14 X users
facebook
4 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
25 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
126 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
When mirroring is both simple and “smart”: how mimicry can be embodied, adaptive, and non-representational
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00505
Pubmed ID
Authors

Evan W. Carr, Piotr Winkielman

Abstract

The concept of mirroring has become rather ubiquitous. One of the most fundamental empirical and theoretical debates within research on mirroring concerns the role of mental representations: while some models argue that higher-order representational mechanisms underpin most cases of mirroring, other models argue that they only moderate a primarily non-representational process. As such, even though research on mirroring-along with its neural substrates, including the putative mirror neuron system-has grown tremendously, so too has confusion about what it actually means to "mirror". Using recent research on spontaneous imitation, we argue that flexible mirroring effects can be fully embodied and dynamic-even in the absence of higher-order mental representations. We propose that mirroring can simply reflect an adaptive integration and utilization of cues obtained from the brain, body, and environment, which is especially evident within the social context. Such a view offers reconciliation among both representational and non-representational frameworks in cognitive neuroscience, which will facilitate revised interpretations of modern (and seemingly divergent) findings on when and how these embodied mirroring responses are employed.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 126 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 4 3%
Hungary 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Chile 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Austria 1 <1%
Germany 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 112 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 34 27%
Student > Master 20 16%
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 9%
Other 8 6%
Other 21 17%
Unknown 15 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 41%
Neuroscience 11 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 6%
Social Sciences 6 5%
Other 17 13%
Unknown 22 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 26. 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 27 July 2022.
All research outputs
#1,270,885
of 22,971,207 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#611
of 7,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,524
of 227,522 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#31
of 252 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,971,207 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,181 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 227,522 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 252 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.