Cited by 139Action Observation and SynchronizationFree Will and AgencyMotor Control and Adaptation

What is matched in direct matching? Intention attribution modulates motor priming

Liepelt, Roman, Cramon, D. Yves Von, Brass, Marcel·2008·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Abstract

Converging evidence has shown that action observation and execution are tightly linked. The observation of an action directly activates an equivalent internal motor representation in the observer (direct matching). However, whether direct matching is primarily driven by basic perceptual features of the observed movement or is influenced by more abstract interpretative processes is an open question. A series of behavioral experiments tested whether direct matching, as measured by motor priming, can be modulated by inferred action goals and attributed intentions. Experiment 1 tested whether observing an unsuccessful attempt to execute an action is sufficient to produce a motor-priming effect. Experiment 2 tested alternative perceptual explanations for the observed findings. Experiment 3 investigated whether the attribution of intention modulates motor priming by comparing motor-priming effects during observation of intended and unintended movements. Experiment 4 tested whether participants' interpretation of the movement as triggered by an external source or the actor's intention modulates the motor-priming effect by a pure instructional manipulation. Our findings support a model in which direct matching can be top-down modulated by the observer's interpretation of the observed movement as intended or not.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0096-1523.34.3.578

Cites

8 of 8 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Recent findings show that imitative compatibility is modulated by the inferred goals and intentions associated with perceived movements.

    “One last source of evidence suggesting a dissociation between imitative and spatial compatibility concerns recent findings showing that imitative compatibility is modulated by the inferred goals and intentions associated with perceived movements (e.g., Liepelt, Cramon, & Brass, 2008).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liepelt, R., Cramon, D. Y. V., & Brass, M.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance
Published
2008
Volume
34
Issue
3
Pages
578-591
ISSN
  • 0096-1523 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1277
OpenAlex
W2064010584
Cited by
139
References
8
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
18.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Sponsor name not included (EDICI-12929)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Free Will and Agency
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
Keywords
direct matching, action observation, motor priming, intention attribution, action goals, top-down modulation, action execution
MeSH terms
Adult, Facial Expression, Female, Gestures, Humans, Male, Psychomotor Performance, Reaction Time, Visual Perception, Intention

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