↓ Skip to main content

We can work it out: an enactive look at cooperation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 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 (90th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (79th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
8 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
48 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
141 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
We can work it out: an enactive look at cooperation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00874
Pubmed ID
Authors

Valentina Fantasia, Hanne De Jaegher, Alessandra Fasulo

Abstract

The past years have seen an increasing debate on cooperation and its unique human character. Philosophers and psychologists have proposed that cooperative activities are characterized by shared goals to which participants are committed through the ability to understand each other's intentions. Despite its popularity, some serious issues arise with this approach to cooperation. First, one may challenge the assumption that high-level mental processes are necessary for engaging in acting cooperatively. If they are, then how do agents that do not possess such ability (preverbal children, or children with autism who are often claimed to be mind-blind) engage in cooperative exchanges, as the evidence suggests? Secondly, to define cooperation as the result of two de-contextualized minds reading each other's intentions may fail to fully acknowledge the complexity of situated, interactional dynamics and the interplay of variables such as the participants' relational and personal history and experience. In this paper we challenge such accounts of cooperation, calling for an embodied approach that sees cooperation not only as an individual attitude toward the other, but also as a property of interaction processes. Taking an enactive perspective, we argue that cooperation is an intrinsic part of any interaction, and that there can be cooperative interaction before complex communicative abilities are achieved. The issue then is not whether one is able or not to read the other's intentions, but what it takes to participate in joint action. From this basic account, it should be possible to build up more complex forms of cooperation as needed. Addressing the study of cooperation in these terms may enhance our understanding of human social development, and foster our knowledge of different ways of engaging with others, as in the case of autism.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 141 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 1%
France 1 <1%
Netherlands 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Philippines 1 <1%
Unknown 135 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 31 22%
Researcher 20 14%
Student > Master 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 12 9%
Professor 9 6%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 26 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 35%
Arts and Humanities 10 7%
Computer Science 9 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 4%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 32 23%
Unknown 30 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 28 August 2022.
All research outputs
#2,255,485
of 24,027,644 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,432
of 32,249 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,059
of 234,745 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#78
of 378 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,027,644 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 32,249 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 234,745 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 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 378 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.