Partner reactions and task set selection: Compatibility is more beneficial in the stronger task

Social Action Effects: Representing Predicted Partner Responses in Social Interactions

The sociomotor framework outlines a possible role of social action effects on human action control, suggesting that anticipated partner reactions are a major cue to represent, select, and initiate own body movements. Here, we review studies that elucidate the actual content of social action representations and that explore factors that can distinguish action control processes involving social and inanimate action effects. Specifically, we address two hypotheses on how the social context can influence effect-based action control: first, by providing unique social features such as body-related, anatomical codes, and second, by orienting attention towards any relevant feature dimensions of the action effects. The reviewed empirical work presents a surprisingly mixed picture: while there is indirect evidence for both accounts, previous studies that directly addressed the anatomical account showed no signs of the involvement of genuinely social features in sociomotor action control. Furthermore, several studies show evidence against the differentiation of social and non-social action effect processing, portraying sociomotor action representations as remarkably non-social. A focus on enhancing the social experience in future studies should, therefore, complement the current database to establish whether such settings give rise to the hypothesized influence of social context.

Anticipation in sociomotor actions: Similar effects for in- and outgroup interactions

In social interactions, own actions often trigger a particular response from another person. The sociomotor framework proposes that this consistent behavior of others can become incorporated into own action control. In line with this idea, recent studies have shown that own motor actions are facilitated if they are predictably being imitated rather than counterimitated by a social interaction partner. In the present study, we investigated whether this finding is influenced by the relationship between the interacting persons. To that end, we manipulated whether a participant was being imitated and counterimitated by an ingroup or by an outgroup member. In two experiments, we found a beneficial influence of being imitated irrespective of group membership. The results suggest that, while people incorporated their partner's behavior into own action control, this was not further qualified by group membership as a higher-order social variable. This finding points to a universal account of action control for actions with social action effects and actions with inanimate action effects alike.

Revisiting intersubjective action-effect binding: No evidence for social moderators

Effect-based accounts of human action control have recently highlighted the possibility of representing one's own actions in terms of anticipated changes in the behavior of social interaction partners. In contrast to action effects that pertain to the agent's body or the agent's physical environment, social action effects have been proposed to come with peculiarities inherent to their social nature. Here, we revisit the currently most prominent demonstration of such a peculiarity: the role of eye contact for action-effect learning in social contexts (Sato & Itakura, 2013, Cognition, 127, 383-390). In contrast to the previous demonstration of action-effect learning, a conceptual and a direct replication both yielded evidence for the absence of action-effect learning in the proposed design, irrespective of eye contact. Bayesian statistics supported this claim by demonstrating evidence in favor of the null hypothesis of no effect. These results suggest a limited generalizability of the original findings-for example, due to limitations that are inherent in the proposed study design or due to cultural differences.