↓ Skip to main content

Automatic imitation in a rich social context with virtual characters

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
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 (88th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
22 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
24 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Automatic imitation in a rich social context with virtual characters
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00790
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xueni Pan, Antonia F. de C. Hamilton

Abstract

It has been well established that people respond faster when they perform an action that is congruent with an observed action than when they respond with an incongruent action. Here we propose a new method of using interactive Virtual Characters (VCs) to test if social congruency effects can be obtained in a richer social context with sequential hand-arm actions. Two separate experiments were conducted, exploring if it is feasible to measure spatial congruency (Experiment 1) and anatomical congruency (Experiment 2) in response to a VC, compared to the same action sequence indicated by three virtual balls. In Experiment 1, we found a robust spatial congruency effect for both VC and virtual balls, modulated by a social facilitation effect for participants who felt the VC was human. In Experiment 2 which allowed for anatomical congruency, a form by congruency interaction provided evidence that participants automatically imitate the actions of the VC but do not imitate the balls. Our method and results build a bridge between studies using minimal stimuli in automatic interaction and studies of mimicry in a rich social interaction, and open new research venue for future research in the area of automatic imitation with a more ecologically valid social interaction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 22 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 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
United States 1 1%
Poland 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 86 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 20%
Student > Bachelor 15 16%
Researcher 13 14%
Student > Master 12 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Other 15 16%
Unknown 11 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 39 43%
Computer Science 11 12%
Engineering 4 4%
Neuroscience 3 3%
Social Sciences 3 3%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 18 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 12 July 2016.
All research outputs
#2,580,397
of 25,765,370 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#5,121
of 34,783 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#31,579
of 280,771 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#100
of 528 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,765,370 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,783 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% 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 280,771 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 528 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.