Cargando…

Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation

Individuals have the automatic tendency to imitate each other. A key prediction of different theories explaining automatic imitation is that individuals imitate in-group members more strongly than out-group members. However, the empirical basis for this prediction is rather inconclusive. Only a few...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Genschow, Oliver, Westfal, Mareike, Cracco, Emiel, Crusius, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8942900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34109471
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01526-1
_version_ 1784673404777922560
author Genschow, Oliver
Westfal, Mareike
Cracco, Emiel
Crusius, Jan
author_facet Genschow, Oliver
Westfal, Mareike
Cracco, Emiel
Crusius, Jan
author_sort Genschow, Oliver
collection PubMed
description Individuals have the automatic tendency to imitate each other. A key prediction of different theories explaining automatic imitation is that individuals imitate in-group members more strongly than out-group members. However, the empirical basis for this prediction is rather inconclusive. Only a few experiments have investigated the influence of group membership using classic automatic imitation paradigms and these experiments led to mixed results. To put the group membership prediction to a critical test, we carried out six high-powered experiments (total N = 1538) in which we assessed imitation with the imitation-inhibition task and manipulated group membership in different ways. Evidence across all experiments indicates that group membership does not modulate automatic imitation. Moreover, we do not find support for the idea that feelings of affiliation or perceived similarity moderate the effect of group membership on automatic imitation. These results have important implications for theories explaining automatic imitation and contribute to the current discussion of whether automatic imitation can be socially modulated. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00426-021-01526-1.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8942900
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-89429002022-04-07 Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation Genschow, Oliver Westfal, Mareike Cracco, Emiel Crusius, Jan Psychol Res Original Article Individuals have the automatic tendency to imitate each other. A key prediction of different theories explaining automatic imitation is that individuals imitate in-group members more strongly than out-group members. However, the empirical basis for this prediction is rather inconclusive. Only a few experiments have investigated the influence of group membership using classic automatic imitation paradigms and these experiments led to mixed results. To put the group membership prediction to a critical test, we carried out six high-powered experiments (total N = 1538) in which we assessed imitation with the imitation-inhibition task and manipulated group membership in different ways. Evidence across all experiments indicates that group membership does not modulate automatic imitation. Moreover, we do not find support for the idea that feelings of affiliation or perceived similarity moderate the effect of group membership on automatic imitation. These results have important implications for theories explaining automatic imitation and contribute to the current discussion of whether automatic imitation can be socially modulated. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00426-021-01526-1. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-06-09 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8942900/ /pubmed/34109471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01526-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Article
Genschow, Oliver
Westfal, Mareike
Cracco, Emiel
Crusius, Jan
Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title_full Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title_fullStr Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title_full_unstemmed Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title_short Group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
title_sort group membership does not modulate automatic imitation
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8942900/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34109471
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01526-1
work_keys_str_mv AT genschowoliver groupmembershipdoesnotmodulateautomaticimitation
AT westfalmareike groupmembershipdoesnotmodulateautomaticimitation
AT craccoemiel groupmembershipdoesnotmodulateautomaticimitation
AT crusiusjan groupmembershipdoesnotmodulateautomaticimitation