Embodiment of motor skills when observing expert and novice athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
If people are shown a dynamic movie of an action such as kicking a soccer ball or hitting a tennis ball, they will respond to it faster if it requires the same effector. This standard congruency effect was reported to reverse when participants viewed static images of famous athletes not actually performing an action. It was suggested that the congruent response was inhibited because of a social contrast effect, based on an implied action, whereby responders viewed themselves as comparatively worse than the professional athlete. The present study recorded hand and foot responses when identifying static images of both famous and novice athletes in soccer and tennis. The action was either explicit or implied. In Experiment 1, a standard congruency effect was found for all images. In Experiment 2, when a response was based on the identity of the athlete rather than their expertise, the standard congruency effect was enhanced for images of novice athletes, but was eliminated for experts, suggesting a social contrast effect. Our study is the first to show that embodiment effects can be seen for implied and explicit action images of both novices and experts, and that static images are capable of eliciting priming effects associated with sport-relevant effector pairings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".