What is Shared in Joint Action? Issues of Co-representation, Response Conflict, and Agent Identification
Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (2):147-172 (2011)
|Abstract||When sharing a task with another person that requires turn taking, as in doubles games of table tennis, performance on the shared task is similar to performing the whole task alone. This has been taken to indicate that humans co-represent their partner’s task share, as if it were their own. Task co-representation allows prediction of the other’s responses when it is the other’s turn, and leads to response conflict in joint interference tasks. However, data from our lab cast doubt on the view that task co-representation and resulting response conflict are the only or even primary source of effects observed in task sharing. Recent findings furthermore suggest another potential source of interference in joint task performance that has been neglected so far: Self-other discrimination and conflict related to agent identification (i.e., determining whether it is “my” or the other’s turn). Based on these findings we propose that participants might not always co-represent what their partner is supposed to do, but instead co-represent that another agent is responsible for part of the task, and when it is his turn. We call this account the actor co-representation account|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Stephen Andrew Butterfill (2012). Joint Action and Development. Philosophical Quarterly 61 (246):23-47.
Riccardo Fusaroli, Bahador Bahrami, Karsten Olsen, Andreas Roepstorff, Geraint Rees, Chris Frith & Kristian Tylén (2012). Coming to Terms: Quantifying the Benefits of Linguistic Coordination. Psychological Science 23 (8):931-939.
Aline Sevenants, Kristien Dieussaert & Walter Schaeken (2011). Truth Table Tasks: Irrelevance and Cognitive Ability. Thinking and Reasoning 17 (3):213 - 246.
Elisabeth Pacherie (2011). Framing Joint Action. Review of Philosophy and Psychology 2 (2):173-192.
Shenjiang Mo, Simon A. Booth & Zhongming Wang (2012). How Do Chinese Firms Deal with Inter-Organizational Conflict? Journal of Business Ethics 108 (1):121-129.
Juyang Weng (2009). Task Muddiness, Intelligence Metrics, and the Necessity of Autonomous Mental Development. Minds and Machines 19 (1):93-115.
Ali Jannati, Thomas M. Spalek & Vincent di Lollo (forthcoming). Neither Backward Masking of T2 nor Task Switching is Necessary for the Attentional Blink. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review.
Karl Hostetler (1998). Towards a Perfectionist Response to Ethical Conflict. Studies in Philosophy and Education 17 (4):295-302.
Eddy J. Davelaar (2011). Processes Versus Representations: Cognitive Control as Emergent, Yet Componential. Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):247-252.
Troy A. W. Visser & Philip M. Merikle (1999). Conscious and Unconscious Processes: The Effects of Motivation. Consciousness and Cognition 8 (1):94-113.
Aline Sevenants, Kristien Dieussaert & Walter Schaeken (2012). Is the Truth Table Task Mistaken? Thinking and Reasoning 18 (2):119 - 132.
Marion Godman (2013). Why We Do Things Together: The Social Motivation for Joint Action. Philosophical Psychology 26 (4):588-603.
Luuk Matthijssen (1998). A Task-Based Interface to Legal Databases. Artificial Intelligence and Law 6 (1):81-103.
Added to index2011-05-22
Total downloads8 ( #131,679 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?