14
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Two Trackers Are Better than One: Information about the Co-actor's Actions and Performance Scores Contribute to the Collective Benefit in a Joint Visuospatial Task

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          When humans collaborate, they often distribute task demands in order to reach a higher performance compared to performing the same task alone (i.e., a collective benefit). Here, we tested to what extent receiving information about the actions of a co-actor, performance scores, or receiving both types of information impacts the collective benefit in a collaborative multiple object tracking task. In a between-subject design, pairs of individuals jointly tracked a subset of target objects among several moving distractor objects on a computer screen for a 100 trials. At the end of a trial, pairs received performance scores (Experiment 1), information about their partner's target selections (Experiment 2), or both types of information (Experiment 3). In all experiments, the performance of the pair exceeded the individual performances and the simulated performance of two independent individuals combined. Initially, when receiving both types of information (Experiment 3), pairs achieved the highest performance and divided task demands most efficiently compared to the other two experiments. Over time, performances and the ability to divide task demands for pairs receiving a single type of information converged with those receiving both, suggesting that pairs' coordination strategies become equally effective over time across experiments. However, pairs' performances never reached a theoretical limit of performance in all experiments. For distributing task demands, members of a pair predominantly used a left-right division of labor strategy (i.e., the leftmost targets were tracked by one co-actor while the rightmost targets were tracked by the other co-actor). Overall, findings of the present study suggest that receiving information about actions of a co-actor, performance scores, or receiving both enables pairs to devise effective division of labor strategies in a collaborative visuospatial task. However, when pairs had both types of information available, the formation of division of labor strategies was facilitated, indicating that pairs benefited the most from having both types of information available (i.e., actions about the co-actor and performance scores). Findings are applicable to circumstances in which humans need to perform collaborative visuospatial tasks that are time-critical and/or only allow a very limited exchange of information between co-actors.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Optimally interacting minds.

          In everyday life, many people believe that two heads are better than one. Our ability to solve problems together appears to be fundamental to the current dominance and future survival of the human species. But are two heads really better than one? We addressed this question in the context of a collective low-level perceptual decision-making task. For two observers of nearly equal visual sensitivity, two heads were definitely better than one, provided they were given the opportunity to communicate freely, even in the absence of any feedback about decision outcomes. But for observers with very different visual sensitivities, two heads were actually worse than the better one. These seemingly discrepant patterns of group behavior can be explained by a model in which two heads are Bayes optimal under the assumption that individuals accurately communicate their level of confidence on every trial.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Follow you, follow me: continuous mutual prediction and adaptation in joint tapping.

            To study the mechanisms of coordination that are fundamental to successful interactions we carried out a joint finger tapping experiment in which pairs of participants were asked to maintain a given beat while synchronizing to an auditory signal coming from the other person or the computer. When both were hearing each other, the pair became a coupled, mutually and continuously adaptive unit of two "hyper-followers", with their intertap intervals (ITIs) oscillating in opposite directions on a tap-to-tap basis. There was thus no evidence for the emergence of a leader-follower strategy. We also found that dyads were equally good at synchronizing with the irregular, but responsive other as with the predictable, unresponsive computer. However, they performed worse when the "other" was both irregular and unresponsive. We thus propose that interpersonal coordination is facilitated by the mutual abilities to (a) predict the other's subsequent action and (b) adapt accordingly on a millisecond timescale.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Tracking multiple independent targets: evidence for a parallel tracking mechanism.

              There is considerable evidence that visual attention is concentrated at a single locus in the visual field, and that this locus can be moved independent of eye movements. Two studies are reported which suggest that, while certain aspects of attention require that locations be scanned serially, at least one operation may be carried out in parallel across several independent loci in the visual field. That is the operation of indexing features and tracking their identity. The studies show that: (a) subjects are able to track a subset of up to 5 objects in a field of 10 identical randomly-moving objects in order to distinguish a change in a target from a change in a distractor; and (b) when the speed and distance parameters of the display are designed so that, on the basis of some very conservative assumptions about the speed of attention movement and encoding times, the predicted performance of a serial scanning and updating algorithm would not exceed about 40% accuracy, subjects still manage to do the task with 87% accuracy. These findings are discussed in relation to an earlier, and independently motivated model of feature-binding--called the FINST model--which posits a primitive identity maintenance mechanism that indexes and tracks a limited number of visual objects in parallel. These indexes are hypothesized to serve the function of binding visual features prior to subsequent pattern recognition.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Journal
                Front Psychol
                Front Psychol
                Front. Psychol.
                Frontiers in Psychology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                1664-1078
                03 May 2017
                2017
                : 8
                : 669
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Institute of Cognitive Science, Universität Osnabrück Osnabrück, Germany
                [2] 2Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia Vancouver, BC, Canada
                [3] 3Institut für Neurophysiologie und Pathophysiologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf Hamburg, Germany
                Author notes

                Edited by: Silvan Steiner, University of Bern, Switzerland

                Reviewed by: Riccardo Fusaroli, Aarhus University, Denmark; Xavier Sanchez, University of Cumbria, UK

                *Correspondence: Basil Wahn bwahn@ 123456uos.de

                This article was submitted to Performance Science, a section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology

                †shared senior authorship

                Article
                10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00669
                5413551
                28515704
                dfce7026-e825-406d-a298-8981727f9c29
                Copyright © 2017 Wahn, Kingstone and König.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

                History
                : 24 September 2016
                : 13 April 2017
                Page count
                Figures: 5, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 38, Pages: 13, Words: 10146
                Categories
                Psychology
                Original Research

                Clinical Psychology & Psychiatry
                social cognition,visuospatial attention,collective benefit,joint action,multiple object tracking

                Comments

                Comment on this article