↓ Skip to main content

The Functionality of Spontaneous Mimicry and Its Influences on Affiliation: An Implicit Socialization Account

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
43 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
105 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
The Functionality of Spontaneous Mimicry and Its Influences on Affiliation: An Implicit Socialization Account
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00458
Pubmed ID
Authors

Liam C. Kavanagh, Piotr Winkielman

Abstract

There is a broad theoretical and empirical interest in spontaneous mimicry, or the automatic reproduction of a model's behavior. Evidence shows that people mimic models they like, and that mimicry enhances liking for the mimic. Yet, there is no satisfactory account of this phenomenon, especially in terms of its functional significance. While affiliation is often cited as the driver of mimicry, we argue that mimicry is primarily driven by a learning process that helps to produce the appropriate bodily and emotional responses to relevant social situations. Because the learning process and the resulting knowledge is implicit, it cannot easily be rejected, criticized, revised, and employed by the learner in a deliberative or deceptive manner. We argue that these characteristics will lead individuals to preferentially mimic ingroup members, whose implicit information is worth incorporating. Conversely, mimicry of the wrong person is costly because individuals will internalize "bad habits," including emotional reactions and mannerisms indicating wrong group membership. This pattern of mimicry, in turn, means that observed mimicry is an honest signal of group affiliation. We propose that the preferences of models for the mimic stems from this true signal value. Further, just like facial expressions, mimicry communicates a genuine disposition when it is truly spontaneous. Consequently, perceivers are attuned to relevant cues such as appropriate timing, fidelity, and selectivity. Our account, while assuming no previously unknown biological endowments, also explains greater mimicry of powerful people, and why affiliation can be signaled by mimicry of seemingly inconsequential behaviors.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 105 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Unknown 103 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 23%
Student > Bachelor 16 15%
Student > Master 10 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 8%
Researcher 7 7%
Other 19 18%
Unknown 21 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 49 47%
Social Sciences 6 6%
Neuroscience 4 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 3%
Linguistics 3 3%
Other 13 12%
Unknown 27 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 02 June 2016.
All research outputs
#14,875,162
of 25,312,451 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,972
of 34,187 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#150,745
of 307,773 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#252
of 461 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,312,451 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,187 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.2. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% 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 307,773 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 461 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.