Joint action: bodies and minds moving together

The ability to coordinate our actions with those of others is crucial for our success as individuals and as a species. Progress in understanding the cognitive and neural processes involved in joint action has been slow and sparse, because cognitive neuroscientists have predominantly studied individual minds and brains in isolation. However, in recent years, major advances have been made by investigating perception and action in social context. In this article we outline how studies on joint attention, action observation, task sharing, action coordination and agency contribute to the understanding of the cognitive and neural processes supporting joint action. Several mechanisms are proposed that allow individuals to share representations, to predict actions, and to integrate predicted effects of own and others' actions.     

A New form of Tachistoscope

Howard C. Warren. Dictionary of Psychology. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1934. Pp. x+372. $4.50 Reviewed by Raymond Royce Willoughby     

Effects of Emotional Factors Upon Recall

Bendig's (1) Pittsburgh Scales of Social Extraversion-Introversion (SEI) and Emotionality (Em) were translated so that they were of appropriate reading difficulty for children as well as for adults. The revised scales correlated highly (both .90) with the Pittsburgh scales, and they had high test-retest reliabilities (.92 and .89). Data from samples representing third grade to college ages were presented for the revised scales. SEI-Em correlations were nonsignificant for most subsamples, indicating that the revised SEI-Em scales are independent. Scale means were stable across ages. The revised scales should be considered as research instruments, since more representative normative data and validity data are still required. The scales should, though, facilitate developmental research in extraversion and emotionality.     

Two Kinds of Learning

Episodic analysis is the separation of a novel into its component episodes —i.e., into short stories each of which has a unitary theme—in order to provide equivalent units for content analysis. Independent coders show two types of disagreement. Neither is serious for content analysis, and both may be minimized by some suggested ground rules. In a study of 13 stylistically different books, intercoder reliability ranged from 76% to 94%. Variations in accuracy were clearly related to literary style. Relevant information on the coding process and reliability, as well as data on the number and length of episodes in the 13 books, are given in tabular form. Problems connected with reliable coding are discussed and some solutions are suggested.