A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Standard

A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation. / Genschow, Oliver; Cracco, Emiel; Verbeke, Pieter et al.
In: Cognition, Vol. 215, 104824, 01.10.2021.

Research output: Journal contributionsJournal articlesResearchpeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Genschow O, Cracco E, Verbeke P, Westfal M, Crusius J. A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation. Cognition. 2021 Oct 1;215:104824. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104824

Bibtex

@article{2fb1fc1c2ffb44bf8795a241c2eb60a7,
title = "A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation",
abstract = "Individuals automatically imitate a wide range of different behaviors. Previous research suggests that imitation as a social process depends on the similarity between interaction partners. However, some of the experiments supporting this notion could not be replicated and all of the supporting experiments manipulated not only similarity between actor and observer, but also other features. Thus, the existing evidence leaves open whether similarity as such moderates automatic imitation. To directly test the similarity account, in four experiments, we manipulated participants' focus on similarities or differences while holding the stimulus material constant. In Experiment 1, we presented participants with a hand and let them either focus on similarities, differences, or neutral aspects between their own hand and the other person's hand. The results indicate that focusing on similarities increased perceived similarity between the own and the other person's hand. In Experiments 2 to 4, we tested the hypothesis that focusing on similarities, as compared with differences, increases automatic imitation. Experiment 2 tested the basic effect and found support for our prediction. Experiment 3 and 4 replicated this finding with higher-powered samples. Exploratory investigations further suggest that it is a focus on differences that decreases automatic imitation, and not a focus on similarities that increases automatic imitation. Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.",
keywords = "Automatic imitation, Comparison processes, Motor learning, Similarity, Business psychology",
author = "Oliver Genschow and Emiel Cracco and Pieter Verbeke and Mareike Westfal and Jan Crusius",
note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation (DFG; funding ID: GE 3040/2-1 ) as part of the DFG Research Unit “Relativity in Social Cognition” (FOR 2150) Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2021 Elsevier B.V.",
year = "2021",
month = oct,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104824",
language = "English",
volume = "215",
journal = "Cognition",
issn = "0010-0277",
publisher = "Elsevier B.V.",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - A direct test of the similarity assumption — Focusing on differences as compared with similarities decreases automatic imitation

AU - Genschow, Oliver

AU - Cracco, Emiel

AU - Verbeke, Pieter

AU - Westfal, Mareike

AU - Crusius, Jan

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by a grant from the German Research Foundation (DFG; funding ID: GE 3040/2-1 ) as part of the DFG Research Unit “Relativity in Social Cognition” (FOR 2150) Publisher Copyright: © 2021 Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2021/10/1

Y1 - 2021/10/1

N2 - Individuals automatically imitate a wide range of different behaviors. Previous research suggests that imitation as a social process depends on the similarity between interaction partners. However, some of the experiments supporting this notion could not be replicated and all of the supporting experiments manipulated not only similarity between actor and observer, but also other features. Thus, the existing evidence leaves open whether similarity as such moderates automatic imitation. To directly test the similarity account, in four experiments, we manipulated participants' focus on similarities or differences while holding the stimulus material constant. In Experiment 1, we presented participants with a hand and let them either focus on similarities, differences, or neutral aspects between their own hand and the other person's hand. The results indicate that focusing on similarities increased perceived similarity between the own and the other person's hand. In Experiments 2 to 4, we tested the hypothesis that focusing on similarities, as compared with differences, increases automatic imitation. Experiment 2 tested the basic effect and found support for our prediction. Experiment 3 and 4 replicated this finding with higher-powered samples. Exploratory investigations further suggest that it is a focus on differences that decreases automatic imitation, and not a focus on similarities that increases automatic imitation. Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.

AB - Individuals automatically imitate a wide range of different behaviors. Previous research suggests that imitation as a social process depends on the similarity between interaction partners. However, some of the experiments supporting this notion could not be replicated and all of the supporting experiments manipulated not only similarity between actor and observer, but also other features. Thus, the existing evidence leaves open whether similarity as such moderates automatic imitation. To directly test the similarity account, in four experiments, we manipulated participants' focus on similarities or differences while holding the stimulus material constant. In Experiment 1, we presented participants with a hand and let them either focus on similarities, differences, or neutral aspects between their own hand and the other person's hand. The results indicate that focusing on similarities increased perceived similarity between the own and the other person's hand. In Experiments 2 to 4, we tested the hypothesis that focusing on similarities, as compared with differences, increases automatic imitation. Experiment 2 tested the basic effect and found support for our prediction. Experiment 3 and 4 replicated this finding with higher-powered samples. Exploratory investigations further suggest that it is a focus on differences that decreases automatic imitation, and not a focus on similarities that increases automatic imitation. Theoretical implications and future directions are discussed.

KW - Automatic imitation

KW - Comparison processes

KW - Motor learning

KW - Similarity

KW - Business psychology

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85110143967&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104824

DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104824

M3 - Journal articles

C2 - 34242855

AN - SCOPUS:85110143967

VL - 215

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

SN - 0010-0277

M1 - 104824

ER -

Recently viewed

Publications

  1. Tree cover mediates the effect on rapeseed leaf damage of excluding predatory arthropods, but in an unexpected way
  2. Mapping Complexity in Environmental Governance
  3. Comparing Instrument-induced effects in EFL requests
  4. Detection of significant tracer gases by means of polymer gas sensors
  5. Is Calluna vulgaris a suitable bio-monitor of management-mediated nutrient pools in heathland ecosystems?
  6. Scaffolding, software and scenarios
  7. Bordering the Area of Spatial Relevance for Schools
  8. Common Ground and Development
  9. Towards a Model for Building Trust and Acceptance of Artificial Intelligence Aided Medical Assessment Systems
  10. Optimal grazing management rules in semi-arid rangelands with uncertain rainfall
  11. A sensitive microsystem as biosensor for cell growth monitoring and antibiotic testing
  12. The effectiveness of nudging
  13. Influences of yttrium content on microstructure and mechanical properties of as-cast Mg–Ca–Y–Zr alloys
  14. Absolute and relative maximum strength measures show differences in their correlations with sprint and jump performances in trained youth soccer players
  15. DECODING SUSTAINABILITY IN THE HEALTHCARE SYSTEM. TEACHING STUDENTS HOW TO PROBLEMATIZE COMPLEX CONCEPTS
  16. The challenges of gamifying CSR communication
  17. Preference and willingness to pay for meat substitutes based on micro-algae
  18. Improved mechanical properties of cast Mg alloy welds via texture weakening by differential rotation refill friction stir spot welding
  19. The patterns of curriculum change processes that embed sustainability in higher education institutions
  20. Simultaneous Determination of 11 Sulfonamides by HPLC–UV and Application for Fast Screening of Their Aerobic Elimination and Biodegradation in a Simple Test
  21. The Role of Public Participation in Managing Uncertainty in the Implementation of the Water Framework Directive
  22. Determiner Ellipsis in Electronic Writing - Discourse or Syntax?
  23. Gehen in der Datenbank – Der BMLwalker
  24. Sustainability Transitions and the Spatial Interface: Developing Conceptual Perspectives
  25. Replik
  26. Organizing Colour
  27. Evaluation of a temporal causal model for predicting the mood of clients in an online therapy
  28. Almost-invariant sets and invariant manifolds
  29. Knowledge and social learning for sustainable development
  30. Norms and variation in L2 pragmatics
  31. Does Social Exclusion Improve Detection of Real and Fake Smiles?
  32. Medial erzeugte Befindlichkeiten
  33. Lifelong learning in practice at Leuphana University
  34. Productivity and size of the export market
  35. Repräsentative Wahlstatistik
  36. Using a leverage points perspective to compare social-ecological systems: a case study on rural landscapes
  37. Greater fit and a greater gap
  38. Case Study: Between radiation and imagination
  39. Formation mechanism of the abnormal texture during extrusion in Mg-Y-Sm-Zn-Zr alloy
  40. Article 6
  41. Continous preventive diagnosis for cardiovascular diseases based on stochastic modeling
  42. Anisotropic wavelet bases and thresholding
  43. AAL-Onto