Cited by 233Action Observation and SynchronizationAttachment and Relationship DynamicsEmbodied and Extended Cognition

Strangers in sync: achieving embodied rapport through shared movements.

Open access
Vacharkulksemsuk, Tanya, Fredrickson, Barbara L.·2012·Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Abstract

This paper examines the emergence of behavioral synchrony among strangers in the context of self-disclosure, and their path in predicting interaction quality. Specifically, we hypothesize that behavioral synchrony mediates the direct effect of self-disclosure on the development of embodied rapport. Same-sex stranger pairs (n=94) were randomly assigned to a videorecorded self-disclosure or control condition, and afterward each member rated their social interaction. Following the procedure used by Bernieri, Reznick, & Rosenthal (1988), two trained judges independently watched each video record and rated each pair interaction on behavioral synchrony. Bootstrapping analyses provide support for the hypothesized mediating effect of behavioral synchrony, which emerged as independent of the effects of self-other overlap and positive affect. The authors discuss implications of behavioral synchrony for relationship formation processes and the inevitable entwinement of behavior and judgments in light of embodied cognition.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jesp.2011.07.015

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vacharkulksemsuk, T., & Fredrickson, B. L.
Affiliations
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (US)
Corresponding author
Vacharkulksemsuk, Tanya
Venue
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-01
Volume
48
Issue
1
Pages
399-402
ISSN
0022-1031 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2033243590
Cited by
231
References
34
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 5
FWCI
8.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Social Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Carolina Digital Repository (University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) (submittedVersion)
  • UNC Libraries
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH 59615, R01MH059615)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
Keywords
behavioral synchrony, self-disclosure, strangers, interaction quality, relationship formation, embodied cognition, self-other overlap, positive affect

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review