SD of (A) and (B).

<p>Vertical bars represent between-subjects standard deviations.</p

Mutual_stabilization

Readme file for data used in study: "Mutual Stabilization of Rhythmic Vocalization and Whole-Body Movement " K. Miyata, K. Kudo PLOS ONE For questions regarding the data, please contact the authors: K. Miyata ([email protected]

Knee movement trajectory and voice time on the phase plane.

<p>Knee movement trajectory on the phase plane (A). The phase angle is expressed as the difference from the peak knee position. In the flexion-on-the-voice condition, difference between voice time and the peak knee-flexion point is calculated (B), and in the extension-on-the-voice condition, difference between voice time and the peak knee-extension point is calculated (C).</p

Typical examples of the phase angle of voice time for one participant.

<p>The value at the top of each trajectory is the average voice frequency in each trial. In the extension-on-the-voice condition (B), the replacement of joint extension on the voice by joint flexion on the voice occurred at 180 bpm. This replacement did not occur in the flexion-on-the-voice condition.</p

Mean voice frequency (A) and SD of voice frequency (B).

<p>Vertical bars represent between-subjects standard deviations.</p

Phase angle of voice time (A) and SD of phase angle (B).

<p>Vertical bars represent between-subjects standard deviations.</p

Flexion on the voice condition (A) and extension on the voice condition (B).

<p>In the flexion-on-the-voice condition, participants flexed their hip, knee, and ankle joints in line with a vocalization (A). In the extension-on-the-voice condition, participants extended their joints in line with a vocalization (B).</p

Cognitive Bias for the Distribution of Ball Landing Positions in Amateur Tennis Players (Cognitive Bias for the Motor Variance in Tennis)

<p>This study aimed to investigate whether the isotropy bias (estimating one's own motor variance as an approximately circular distribution rather than a vertically elongated distribution) arises in tennis players for the estimation of the two-dimensional variance for forehand strokes in tennis (Experiment 1), as well as the process underlying the isotropy bias (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, 31 tennis players were asked to estimate prospectively their distribution of ball landing positions. They were then instructed to hit 50 forehand strokes. We compared the eccentricity of the ellipse calculated from estimated and observed landing positions. Eccentricity was significantly smaller in the estimated ellipse than in the observed ellipse. We assumed that the isotropy bias for the estimated ellipse comes from the process of variance estimation. In Experiment 2, nine participants estimated the 95% confidence interval of 300 dots. Eccentricity was significantly smaller in their estimated ellipses than it was in the ellipses for the dots, though the magnitude of bias decreased for the estimation of dots. These results suggest that the isotropy bias in tennis ball landing position includes the bias of recognizing landing position and the bias of estimating the ellipse confidence interval from the recognized landing position.</p

Mean HR and RPE in Experiment 2.

HR (A) was averaged from 0 to 3 min and 3 to 5 min and 30 s, and RPE (B) was at 3 and 5 min after the start of each trial in each condition. The error bars represent the SD. There was no difference in HR or RPE between conditions.</p

Beat and joint angle data

This zip file includes metronome beat data and joint angle data for each participant