Abstract
Introduction & Purpose
Interpersonal synchrony constitutes a fundamental aspect of human social interaction and group dynamics (Gordon et al., 2020). During unstructured social exchanges, individuals often spontaneously align subtle behavioral patterns (Thepsoonthorn et al., 2016). In other contexts, synchrony is explicitly required for a successful performance; for example, musicians performing in ensembles must coordinate not only their musical output but also their bodily movements to achieve successful joint performance (e.g., Chang et al., 2019). Beyond overt behavioral coordination, interpersonal synchrony also extends to physiological processes. Physiological synchrony refers to the temporal alignment of physiological signals such as heart rate, electrodermal activity, and respiration across individuals (Palumbo et al., 2017). Physiological synchrony is typically quantified by measuring these signals throughout a specific task and assessing their temporal alignment using methods such as cross-correlation or wavelet coherence (Denk et al., 2024).
Although interest in physiological synchrony has increased substantially, its occurrence and functional implications across different interaction contexts remain insufficiently understood, particularly in situations involving performance demands or stress. Addressing this gap, my research investigates how physiological synchrony emerges across distinct forms of interaction and how it influences performance outcomes. The overarching aim of this research project is to advance our understanding of physiological synchrony as a mechanism underlying team performance in cooperative and stressful settings. We hypothesize that physiological synchrony increases in both contexts. However, whereas increased synchrony during cooperation enhances team performance, increased synchrony under stress is expected to impair performance.
Methods
Three studies examined physiological synchrony in dyadic interactions by measuring heart rate and electrodermal synchrony. Study 1 investigated synchrony in 30 professional improvisation dyads during a 10-minute free musical improvisation. Study 2 examined synchrony during a physically active basketball task in which 12 professional basketball players coordinated simultaneous behind-the-back passes. Study 3 assessed synchrony in 36 dyads during a cooperative motor task involving a balance game, while experimentally inducing stress in one interaction partner.
Results
Across studies, physiological synchrony increased during cooperative interaction compared with control conditions. In Study 1, participants showed stronger physiological alignment during joint musical improvisation than during baseline recordings or an observation phase. Heart rate synchrony was additionally associated with higher perceived aesthetic quality of the music. In Study 2, basketball players demonstrated greater physiological synchrony during joint compared to individual performance; however, synchrony was unrelated to passing success. Preliminary findings from Study 3 indicate that experimentally induced stress was accompanied by increased physiological synchrony, heightened electrodermal activity as an indicator of stress, and reduced task performance.
Discussion
Together, these findings support previous research indicating that physiological synchrony commonly emerges during dyadic interactions. Increased synchrony under stress further indicates that stress experienced by one individual may influence interaction partners stress response through interpersonal physiological coupling and may negatively affect the team’s performance. Variability in performance effects across studies may reflect differences in task relevance and participant engagement.
Conclusion
Overall, these findings contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the emergence and functional consequences of physiological synchrony across diverse social interaction contexts.
References
Chang, A., Kragness, H. E., Livingstone, S. R., Bosnyak, D. J., & Trainor, L. J. (2019). Body sway reflects joint emotional expression in music ensemble performance. Scientific Reports, 9(1), Article 205. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-36358-4
D’Amario, S., Schmidbauer, H., Roesch, A., Goebl, W., Niemand, A. M., & Bishop, L. (2023). Interperformer coordination in piano-singing duo performances: Phrase structure and empathy impact. Psychological Research, 87(8), 2559–2582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-023-01818-8
Denk, B., Dimitroff, S. J., Meier, M., Wienhold, S., Gaertner, R. J., Klink, E. S. C., Volkmer, N., Benz, A. B. E., Bentele, U. U., & Pruessner, J. C. (2024). Physiological synchrony of the autonomic nervous system: An analysis and comparison of different methods [Preprint]. OSF Preprints. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dws8c.
Gordon, I., Gilboa, A., Cohen, S., Milstein, N., Haimovich, N., Pinhasi, S., & Siegman, S. (2020). Physiological and behavioral synchrony predict group cohesion and performance. Scientific Reports, 10(1), Article 8484. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-65670-1
Keller, P. E. (2014). Ensemble performance: Interpersonal alignment of musical expression. In D. Fabian, R. Timmers, & E. Schubert (Eds.), Expressiveness in music performance: Empirical approaches across styles and cultures (pp. 260–282). Oxford University Press.
Palumbo, R. V., Marraccini, M. E., Weyandt, L. L., Wilder-Smith, O., McGee, H. A., Liu, S., & Goodwin, M. S. (2017). Interpersonal autonomic physiology: A systematic review of the literature. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21(2), 99–141. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868316628405
Thepsoonthorn, C., Yokozuka, T., Miura, S., Ogawa, K., & Miyake, Y. (2016). Prior knowledge facilitates mutual gaze convergence and head nodding synchrony in face-to-face communication. Scientific Reports, 6, Article 38261. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep38261