Duet synchronization interventions affect social interactions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Humans' complex behavior, such as speech, music, or dance, requires us to coordinate our actions with external sounds as well as with social partners. The presence of a partner can influence individuals' synchronization, and, in turn, social connection with the partner may depend on the degree of synchronization. We manipulated the synchronization quality in intervention conditions to address the causal relationship between observed temporal synchrony and perceived social interaction. Pairs of musician and nonmusician participants first performed a turn-taking task consisting of alternating which partner tapped their melody in synchrony with a metronome (each tap generated the next tone in the melody). In two intervention conditions, participants attempted to synchronize their melodies simultaneously with their partner, either with normal auditory feedback (normal feedback) or randomly placed delayed feedback on 25% of melodic tones (delayed feedback). After each intervention, the turn-taking condition was repeated, and participants completed a questionnaire about connectedness, relationship, and feeling of synchronization with their partner. Results showed that partners' mean asynchronies were more negative following the delayed feedback intervention. In addition, nonmusician partners' tapping variability was larger following the delayed feedback intervention when they had the delayed feedback intervention first. Ratings of connectedness, relationship, and feeling of synchronization with their partner were reduced for all participants after the delayed feedback Intervention. We modeled participants' synchronization performance in the post-intervention turn-taking conditions using delay-coupling oscillator models. Reductions in synchronization performance after delayed feedback intervention were reflected in reduced coupling strength. These findings suggest that turn-taking synchronization performance and social connectedness are altered following short interventions that disrupt synchronization with a partner.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".