Age-Related Changes in Automatic Imitation

―A Cross-Sectional Study of Adults Aged 20-79 Years Old―

Abstract

Motor performance is influenced by the observation of the movements of others, which is known as automatic imitation and is applicable to both everyday movements and sports and exercise. This study examined the automatic imitation tendencies in adults aged 20-79 years old using experimental psychological methods to investigate how automatic imitation tendencies change with age. Participants performed a stimulus-response conflict task, and their reaction times and correct rate were measured. Index of reaction time divided by correct rate (IES: Inverse efficiency score) was calculated to determine the extent to which their motor performance was influenced by their observations of others’ movements. IES in the incongruent condition were higher than those in the congruent condition, suggesting that the automatic imitation tendency is observed regardless of age. We examined the age-related changes in the tendency of automatic imitation, showing that the tendency of automatic imitation in people aged 70-79 years old is stronger than in people aged 20-29 years old. This result suggests that people aged 70 years and older may be more influenced by others when performing an exercise while observing the movements of others than people in other age groups.

References

• Ainley, V., Brass, M., and Tsakiris, M. (2014) Heartfelt imitation: high interoceptive awareness is linked to greater automatic imitation. Neuropsychologia, 60: 21-28.
• Anwyl-Irvine, A., Dalmaijer, E. S., Hodges, N., and Evershed, J. K. (2020) Realistic precision and accuracy of online experiment platforms, web browsers, and devices. Behav. Res. Methods, 53: 1407-1425.
• Bisio, A., Sciutti, A., Nori, F., Metta, G., Fadiga, L., Sandini, G., and Pozzo, T. (2014) Motor contagion during human-human and human-robot interaction. PLoS One, 9 (8) : e106172.
• Blakemore, S. J., and Frith, C. (2005) The role of motor contagion in the prediction of action. Neuropsychologia, 43 (2) : 260-267.
• Bouquet, C. A., Shipley, T. F., Capa, R. L., and Marshall, P. J. (2011) Motor Contagion. Exp. Psychol., 58 (1) : 71-78.
• Brass, M., Bekkering, H., Wohlschläger, A., and Prinz, W. (2000) Compatibility between observed and executed finger movements: comparing symbolic, spatial, and imitative cues. Brain Cogn., 44 (2) : 124-143.
• Bruyer, R., and Brysbaert, M. (2011) Combining speed and accuracy in cognitive psychology: Is the inverse efficiency score (IES) a better dependent variable than the mean reaction time (RT) and the percentage of errors (PE)? Psychol. Belg., 51 (1) : 5-13.
• Bush, L. K., Hess, U., and Wolford, G. (1993) Transformations for within-subject designs: a Monte Carlo investigation. Psychol. Bull., 113 (3) : 566-579.
• Carpenter, M., Uebel, J., and Tomasello, M. (2013) Being mimicked increases prosocial behavior in 18-month-old infants. Child Dev., 84 (5) : 1511-1518.
• Catmur, C., and Heyes, C. (2013) Is it what you do, or when you do it? The roles of contingency and similarity in pro-social effects of imitation. Cogn. Sci., 37 (8) : 1541-1552.
• Chartrand, T. L., and Bargh, J. A. (1999) The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 76 (6) : 893-910.
• Cook, R., Bird, G., Catmur, C., Press, C., and Heyes, C. (2014) Mirror neurons: from origin to function. Behav. Brain Sci., 37 (2) : 177-192.
• D’Ausilio, A., Badino, L., Cipresso, P., Chirico, A., Ferrari, E., Riva, G., and Gaggioli, A. (2015) Automatic imitation of the arm kinematic profile in interacting partners. Cogn. Process., 16 (Suppl 1) : 197-201.
• Der, G., and Deary, I. J. (2006) Age and sex differences in reaction time in adulthood: results from the United Kingdom Health and Lifestyle Survey. Psychol. Aging, 21 (1) : 62-73.
• Deschrijver, E., Wiersema, J. R., and Brass, M. (2017) The influence of action observation on action execution: Dissociating the contribution of action on perception, perception on action, and resolving conflict. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci., 17: 381-393.
• Diersch, N., Cross, E. S., Stadler, W., Schütz-Bosbach, S., and Rieger, M. (2012) Representing others’ actions: the role of expertise in the aging mind. Psychol. Res., 76: 525-541.
• Dignath, D., Born, G., Eder, A., Topolinski, S., and Pfister, R. (2021) Imitation of action-effects increases social affiliation. Psychol. Res., 85: 1922-1933.
• Dolk, T., Hommel, B., Colzato, L. S., Schütz-Bosbach, S., Prinz, W., and Liepelt, R. (2014) The joint Simon effect: a review and theoretical integration. Front. Psychol., 5: 974.
• Edwards, M. G., Humphreys, G. W., and Castiello, U. (2003) Motor facilitation following action observation: a behavioural study in prehensile action. Brain Cogn., 53 (3) : 495-502.
• Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., and Ferraro, F. R. (1999) Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: implications for group differences in response latency. Psychol. Bull., 125 (6) : 777-799.
• Gray, R., and Beilock, S. L. (2011) Hitting is Contagious: Experience and Action Induction. J. Exp. Psychol. Appl., 17 (1) : 49-59.
• Heyes, C. (2011) Automatic imitation. Psychol. Bull., 137 (3) : 463-483.
• Heyes, C. (2021) Imitation. Curr. Biol., 31 (5) : R228-R232.
• Hsieh, S., Wu, M., and Tang, C.H. (2016) Inhibiting prepotent responses in the elderly: Distraction and disinhibition. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci., 16 (1) : 124-134.
• Kilner, J. M., Paulignan, Y., and Blakemore, S. J. (2003) An interference effect of observed biological movement on action. Curr. Biol., 13 (6) : 522-525.
• Miles, L. K., Nind, L. K., and Macrae, C. N. (2009) The rhythm of rapport: Interpersonal synchrony and social perception. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 45 (3) : 585-589.
• Molenberghs, P., Cunnington, R., and Mattingley, J. B. (2012) Brain regions with mirror properties: a meta-analysis of 125 human fMRI studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev., 36 (1) : 341-349.
• Mukai, K., Onagawa, R., and Watanabe, K. (2024) Automatic imitation in children: Age-related change and comparison to adults. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., 50 (1) : 64-73.
• Nakamoto, H., Higuchi, T., and Mann, D. L. (2021) Kinaesthetic cues when predicting the outcomes of the actions of others. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform., 47 (4) : 565-577.
• Over, H. (2020) The Social Function of Imitation in Development. Annu. Rev. Dev. Psychol., 2: 93-109.
• Takeuchi, T., Ikudome, S., Unenaka, S., Ishii, Y., Mori, S., Mann, D. L., and Nakamoto, H. (2018) The inhibition of motor contagion induced by action observation. PLoS One, 13 (10) : e0205725.
• Unenaka, S., Ikudome, S., Mori, S., and Nakamoto, H. (2018) Concurrent imitative movement during action observation facilitates accuracy of outcome prediction in less-skilled performers. Front. Psychol., 9: 323499.
• Vu, K.P. L., and Proctor, R. W. (2008) Age differences in response selection for pure and mixed stimulus-response mappings and tasks. Acta Psychol., 129 (1) : 49-60.
• Wagenmakers, E.-J., and Brown, S. (2007) On the linear relation between the mean and the standard deviation of a response time distribution. Psychol. Rev., 114 (3) : 830-841.
• Welsh, T. N., Kiernan, D., Neyedli, H. F., Ray, M., Pratt, J., Potruff, A., and Weeks, D. J. (2013) Joint Simon effects in extrapersonal space. J. Mot. Behav., 45 (1) : 1-5.
• Wermelinger, S., Moersdorf, L., and Daum, M. M. (2024) Automatic imitation in school-aged children. J. Exp. Child Psychol., 238: 105797.