Staying Together: A Bidirectional Delay–Coupled Approach to Joint Action

To understand how individuals adapt to and anticipate each other in joint tasks, we employ a bidirectional delay–coupled dynamical system that allows for mutual adaptation and anticipation. In delay–coupled systems, anticipation is achieved when one system compares its own time‐delayed behavior, which implicitly includes past information about the other system’s behavior, with the other system’s instantaneous behavior. Applied to joint music performance, the model allows each system to adapt its behavior to the dynamics of the other. Model predictions of asynchrony between two simultaneously produced musical voices were compared with duet pianists’ behavior; each partner performed one voice while auditory feedback perturbations occurred at unpredictable times during live performance. As the model predicted, when auditory feedback from one musical voice was removed, the asynchrony changed: The pianist’s voice that was removed anticipated (preceded) the actions of their partner. When the auditory feedback returned and both musicians could hear each other, they rapidly returned to baseline levels of asynchrony. To understand how the pianists anticipated each other, their performances were fitted by the model to examine change in model parameters (coupling strength, time‐delay). When auditory feedback for one or both voices was removed, the fits showed the expected decrease in coupling strength and time‐delay between the systems. When feedback about the voice(s) returned, the coupling strength and time‐delay returned to baseline. These findings support the idea that when people perform actions together, they do so as a coupled bidirectional anticipatory system.     

The Faulty Magnitude Detector: Why SNARC‐Like Tasks Cannot Support a Generalized Magnitude System

Do people represent space, time, number, and other conceptual domains using a generalized magnitude system (GMS)? To answer this question, numerous studies have used the spatial‐numerical association of response codes (SNARC) task and its variants. Yet, for a combination of reasons, SNARC‐like effects cannot provide evidence for a GMS, even in principle. Rather, these effects support a broader theory of how people use space metaphorically to scaffold their understanding of myriad non‐spatial domains, whether or not these domains exhibit variation in magnitude.     

Developmental sequences in the age of onset of disruptive child behaviors

Retrospective and prospective reports of the onset of disruptive child behaviors were analyzed in a sample of clinic-referred boys. The younger boys (ages 7–9 years), compared with the older boys (ages 10–12 years), showed the highest level of disruptive behavior and, judging from mothers' reports, had the fastest progression of onsets from less serious to more serious problem behaviors. Despite some overlap, developmental sequences in problem behavior within the domains of hyperactivity/inattention, oppositional behavior, and conduct problems were similar across the two age groups. This was also the case for developmental sequences of overt or confrontive problem behaviors and covert or concealing conduct problems. Sequences of the onset of oppositional behavior and conduct problems were validated through prospective data, based on the information from mothers, teachers, and boys themselves. The implications of the findings are discussed for the formulation of developmental pathways of behavior and the analysis of causal factors.