Michael Kimmel

Interpersonal synergy offers a conceptual and methodological framework for analyzing coordinated interaction in dyads and groups. The framework aims at an inquiry of how individuals contribute to a collective behavior and how, in doing so, they coordinate and co-adapt their actions, hereby establishing specific patterns of interplay. The present review retraces the origins of the notion of interpersonal synergy, assesses its scope, delineates synergies from other forms of interaction, and discusses possible mechanisms (such as mutual affordance responsiveness or shared intentions) that mediate the creation of such synergies. It then presents a contrastive “bestiary” of synergy types, which highlights the many shapes and forms in which the phenomenon occurs (e.g., collaborative vs. competitive, spontaneous vs. planned). The final two sections survey analytical approaches, from quantitative metrics which formalize “dynamic fingerprints” of collective dynamics to qualitative and mixed methods studies, which include 1 ^st person perspectives on synergy formation.

Scholars are increasingly recognizing that creativity is grounded in the active sensorimotor engagement with the environment and materiality. Affordances—recognizable pointers to action opportunities in the ecology—provide a helpful prism for analyzing how this happens. Creative practitioners, as they seek aesthetic opportunities or innovation, depend on their sensitivity toward potentialities in their action space. Presently, we apply a high-zoom lens to a crafts process, giving ourmicro-genetic research design an affordance focus. By investigating one of the authors, a ceramicist and a practitioner-researcher, through her process of making of a vase, we tracked how affordances are responded to, developed, shaped, invited or, where necessary, rejected, as the ceramicist “routes” her creative trajectory. Several insights emerge: (1) The ceramicist's decisions—initially about general directions, then about aesthetic details—unfold while engaging with the clay; they emerge in stepwise fashion, but with a holistic orientation. (2) Choosing among affordances requires parallel sensitivities to object functionality, aesthetics and creativity, as well as technical feasibility; adhering to the proper technical procedure that provides the very basis for creatively relevant affordances to later arise. (3) While the hands and eyes engage with short-lived affordances the ceramicist must keep in view higher-timescale affordances that ensure a good task progression for making a vase, and affordances for the material's overall “workability”. (4) The ceramicist typically relates to momentary affordances in light of expected as well as imagined others, to ensure a coherent end product. (5) Affordances contribute to material creativity in more ways than typically recognized in the literature. They range from serendipitous “finds” to options developed with a large degree of creative autonomy; affordances may also be indirectly invited and practitioners strategically change probability distributions as well as providing an enabling background for generative action. Thus, a crafts practitioner brings forth unconventional affordances through active engagement, using a mix of exploration, strategy, and imaginative potential. Affordance theorists err when stressing the possibility to just “find” creative options or that perceptual acuity is the sole skill.

An affordance perspective highlights how resourceful the ecology is for creative actions of all sorts; it captures how creativity is grounded in materiality. In contrast to “canonical affordances” (i.e., “ready-to-hand,” mundane instances), creative affordances point to unconventional or surprising action opportunities that are nonetheless valued. Our initial aim is to discuss how to frame the affordance concept to make it attractive for the study of creativity. We propose a dialectic position that reconciles aspects of the realism of ecological psychology with the constructivist view more typical of creativity scholars. We stress that novel options frequently depend on constructive actions; novelty cannot always simply be “found” or just waits to be used. Many creative opportunities only emerge from how person actively engages with the ecology. Our second aim is to explore specific ways that creativity is mediated through affordances, based on illustrations from crafts and dance. These suggest that affordances span various timescales and mediate in multiple ways, from noticing existing potentials, via active affordance shaping, to background activities that indirectly invite or enable novelty. In conclusion we discuss how a person’s creative “vision,” imagination and combinatoric ability, all fundamental creativity mechanisms, relate to affordances and how fruitful creative directions may be perceptually hinted at.

This article presents a framework to describe how professional experts regulate complex adaptive systems (CAS), a skill found across bio-psychological, ecological, technical, and social contexts. The regulation aim is to facilitate and constrain the self-organization of a CAS; regulators engage in dynamic decision making while the system evolves. While many naive regulators are overtaxed when they encounter nonlinear and multi-causal dynamics, less is known about how experts perform. I argue that a rich set of competencies can make expert performance distinctive. The basic sensitivities for CAS that shape the general philosophy of practice and a role identity as process facilitators provide some foundation. Turning this into an applied skill set, however, additionally requires (a) the creation of mediating interfaces with a "target" CAS, (b) interaction skills for exploring and stimulating the CAS, (c) the use of domain knowledge about the system's nature and structure for conceptualizing its state as well as dynamics, (d) the use of analogical reasoning, categories, heuristics, and models to make "if-then" inferences from systemic problem constellations to holistic strategies, and (e) synoptic and meta-regulative capabilities that allow supervising the mix of deployed resources relative to the demands of ongoing task. These CAS regulation tools mesh in variable ways and can mutually amplify each other, i.e. synergize. Illustrations for the framework come from two somatic therapies (aka bodywork), the Shiatsu and Feldenkrais methods, in which therapists use manual techniques as a regulatory means to help their clients.

Recent voices in creativity research emphasize the vital role that processes of active engagement and interaction play. These distributed, interactivity-based, and ecological accounts critique the reduction of creativity to mental mechanisms and eschew the methodological individualism that underlies this view. Instead, they elevate socio-material couplings to a genuine causal mechanism, hereby explaining why others “are good to be creative with” beyond mutual inspiration or mere constraints on creativity. With improvised dance duets as our example, we introduce a micro-analysis that unpacks these mechanisms from a first-person viewpoint: We describe how the embodied communication at the sub-second scale, a continuous “give and take” between dancers, mediates the co-creation process and how reciprocal micro-actions cumulate into more complex creative effects. Secondly, we distinguish convergent and divergent co-creation dynamics, degrees of playful exploration vs. adaptive pressures, and degrees of individual creative autonomy. Thirdly, we argue that the mix of external constraints, joint exploration, and individual ideation provides a fertile mechanism for co-creation. Finally, we discuss forms of individual creative vision that respect and exploit the dynamic ecology, which can manifest in immediate micro-inspirations, but also in subtle modulations of ongoing process, and in “cultivating” the wider system in ways that benefit novelty.

This article introduces a micro-phenomenological method for interpersonal synergy research, which operates on a sub-second timescale or slightly higher. This is illustrated by two short sequences of joint creativity from Contact Improvisation (CI), a dance where duets produce spontaneous interaction patterns in constant flow and with deep connection of their bodies – their synergies stretch across body boundaries. My aim was to systematically take stock of components of these synergies, to describe sharing patterns, and to reconstruct how joint functionalities such as acrobatic lifts may spontaneously emerge. One focus concerns synergy dynamics, from micro-scale processes of interactive synergy build-up to transitions and larger “flows” in which one synergy evolves into another. A complementary focus concerns how a duet structurally organizes its “collective physics” (weight sharing, skeletal alignment, inter-body muscle chains, etc.) and adjusts them for regulation purposes. The proposed method strikes a balance between subjective meanings and biomechanic descriptiveness, thus providing applied benefits (e.g., for trainers), scholarly benefits (e.g., for modeling improvised synergies), and benefits for interdisciplinary discourse.

“4E” cognitive science has demonstrated that embodied coupling offers powerful resources for reasoning. Despite a surge of studies, little empirical attention is paid to discussing the precise scope of these resources and their possible complementariness with traditional knowledge-based inference. We use decision-making in Shiatsu practice – a bodywork method that employs hands-on interaction with a client – to showcase how the two types of cognitive resources can mesh and offer alternative paths to a task: “Local” resources such as embodied presence, empathy, attunement, as well as skilled perception-action coupling are not only central for implementing a successful therapeutic intervention. The immediate coupling with a client also offers basic means of deciding about fitting and meaningful interventions. Yet, when comprehensive intervention strategies are at stake, Shiatsu decision making must be complemented through “non-local” resources, notably inferences rooted in anatomy/physiology knowledge, categories, heuristics, and mental models. To draw out implications for “4E” cognitive science, we argue that “local” embodied coupling and “non-local” conceptual inferences can functionally complement, inform, and scaffold each other in a dialectic process.