Citation

Cracco E, Brass M. Conscious. Cogn. 2019; 68: 115-118.

Affiliation

Ghent University, Belgium.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.concog.2019.01.001

PMID

30638700

Abstract

In his review, Ramsey (2018) argues that it is currently unclear what reaction time indices of automatic imitation measure due to lacking research on their validity and domain-specificity. In our commentary, we argue that this conclusion is based on two misconceptions, namely that automatic imitation was designed as a laboratory measure of motor mimicry and that psychometric approaches to validity can readily be applied to experimental settings. We then show that reaction time indices of automatic imitation measure covert imitative response tendencies. Furthermore, while irrelevant for their validity, we argue that these indices are associated with some, but not necessarily all, types of overt imitation. Finally, we argue that mapping out the brain networks does not suffice to understand the brain processes underlying imitative control.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Automatic imitation; Commentary; Motor mimicry; Validity