Laura Schmitz

The role of shared visual information for joint action coordination

Highlights • In joint action tasks, co-actors have a choice between different coordination mechanisms.• How joint actions are coordinated depends on shared perceptual information.• In the absence of shared visual information, co-actors rely on a general heuristic strategy.• When shared visual information is available, co-actors switch to a communicative strategy.

Joint Action: Mental Representations, Shared Information and General Mechanisms for Coordinating with Others

In joint action, multiple people coordinate their actions to perform a task together. This often requires precise temporal and spatial coordination. How do co-actors achieve this? How do they coordinate their actions toward a shared task goal? Here, we provide an overview of the mental representations involved in joint action, discuss how co-actors share sensorimotor information and what general mechanisms support coordination with others. By deliberately extending the review to aspects such as the cultural context in which a joint action takes place, we pay tribute to the complex and variable nature of this social phenomenon.

Co-representation of others’ task constraints in joint action.

Previous research has demonstrated that humans tend to represent each other’s tasks even if no interpersonal coordination is required. The present study asked whether coactors in a joint action rely on task co-representation to achieve temporal coordination even if this implies increased movement effort for an unconstrained actor. Pairs of participants performed reaching movements back and forth between two targets, with the aim of synchronizing their landing times. One of the participants needed to move over an obstacle while the other had no obstacle. The results of four experiments showed that the participant without obstacle moved as if an obstacle was obstructing her way. Further amplifying the demands on interpersonal coordination led to a significant increase of this effect, indicating that unconstrained actors represented their coactor’s task constraint and adjusted their own actions accordingly, particularly under high coordination demands. The findings also showed that unconstrained actors represented the object property constraining their coactor’s movement rather than parameters of this movement. We conclude that joint action partners rely on task co-representation to achieve temporal coordination in a task with asymmetric task constraints.

Modulating action duration to establish nonconventional communication.

In many joint actions, knowledge about the precise task to be performed is distributed asymmetrically such that one person has information that another person lacks. In such situations, interpersonal coordination can be achieved if the knowledgeable person modulates basic parameters of her goal-directed actions in a way that provides relevant information to the co-actor with incomplete task knowledge. Whereas such sensorimotor communication has frequently been shown for spatial parameters like movement amplitude, little is known about how co-actors use temporal parameters of their actions to establish communication. The current study investigated whether systematic modulations of action duration provide a sufficient basis for communication. The results of 3 experiments demonstrate that knowledgeable actors spontaneously and systematically adjusted the duration of their actions to communicate task-relevant information if the naïve co-actor could not access this information in other ways. The clearer the communicative signal was the higher was the benefit for the co-actor’s performance. Moreover, we provide evidence that knowledgeable actors have a preference to separate instrumental from communicative aspects of their action. Together, our findings suggest that generating and perceiving systematic deviations from the predicted duration of a goal-directed action can establish nonconventionalized forms of communication during joint action.

Let’s move it together: A review of group benefits in joint object control

In daily life, humans frequently engage in object-directed joint actions, be it carrying a table together or jointly pulling a rope. When two or more individuals control an object together, they may distribute control by performing complementary actions, e.g., when two people hold a table at opposite ends. Alternatively, several individuals may execute control in a redundant manner by performing the same actions, e.g., when jointly pulling a rope in the same direction. Previous research has investigated whether dyads can outperform individuals in tasks where control is either distributed or redundant. The aim of the present review is to integrate findings for these two types of joint control to determine common principles and explain differing results. In sum, we find that when control is distributed, individuals tend to outperform dyads or attain similar performance levels. For redundant control, conversely, dyads have been shown to outperform individuals. We suggest that these differences can be explained by the possibility to freely divide control: Having the option to exercise control redundantly allows co-actors to coordinate individual contributions in line with individual capabilities, enabling them to maximize the benefit of the available skills in the group. In contrast, this freedom to adopt and adapt customized coordination strategies is not available when the distribution of control is determined from the outset.

When Height Carries Weight: Communicating Hidden Object Properties for Joint Action

Abstract In the absence of pre‐established communicative conventions, people create novel communication systems to successfully coordinate their actions toward a joint goal. In this study, we address two types of such novel communication systems: sensorimotor communication, where the kinematics of instrumental actions are systematically modulated, versus symbolic communication. We ask which of the two systems co‐actors preferentially create when aiming to communicate about hidden object properties such as weight. The results of three experiments consistently show that actors who knew the weight of an object transmitted this weight information to their uninformed co‐actors by systematically modulating their instrumental actions, grasping objects of particular weights at particular heights. This preference for sensorimotor communication was reduced in a fourth experiment where co‐actors could communicate with weight‐related symbols. Our findings demonstrate that the use of sensorimotor communication extends beyond the communication of spatial locations to non‐spatial, hidden object properties.

Co-actors represent the order of each other’s actions

Previous research has shown that people represent each other’s tasks and actions when acting together. However, less is known about how co-actors represent each other’s action sequences. Here, we asked whether co-actors represent the order of each other’s actions within an action sequence, or whether they merely represent the intended end state of a joint action together with their own contribution. In the present study, two co-actors concurrently performed action sequences composed of two actions. We predicted that if co-actors represent the order of each other’s actions, they should experience interference when the order of their actions differs. Supporting this prediction, the results of six experiments consistently showed that co-actors moved more slowly when performing the same actions in a different order compared to performing the same actions in the same order. In line with findings from bimanual movement tasks, our results indicate that interference can arise due to differences in movement parameters and due to differences in the perceptual characteristics of movement goals. The present findings extend previous research on co-representation, providing evidence that people represent not only the elements of another’s task, but also their temporal structure.