Rs have emphasized the interaction in joint improvisation as an ecologically valid domain to investigate interpersonal processes, and spontaneous coordinated behavior including interpersonal synchronization (IPS) in unique (Keller et al., 2014; Walton et al., 2015). In a musical joint improvisation, the playing behavior emerges within a context of social collaboration, and without having musical scores. Joint musical improvisation is a complex interaction to study, but Jeung and Herpertz (2014) stress the significance of socially complicated stimuli to study interpersonal processes in individuals with BPD. Basic for the interactions involved in joint musical improvisation are affective and temporal IPS (Iyer, 2004; De Backer and Foubert, 2011; Hennig, 2014). Affective IPS in musical improvisations consists of shared moments which are crucial in changing the partnership and moving it to a deeper level of intersubjectivity inside a therapeutic method. There happen to be numerous studies regarding affective IPS, addressing synchronicity (De Backer, 2008), meaningful moments (Amir, 1996), important moments (Trondalen, 2006), have an effect on attunement (Trondalen and Sk derud, 2007), and interaffective synchronization (Schumacher and Calvet, 2007). In this study, we will focus on temporal IPS. Temporal IPS entails the capacity to plan and execute particular actions at precise instances, in relation to other performers. People can synchronize spontaneously, like when men and women start to walk unintentionally within the same gait cadence. Other forms of temporal IPS can be intentional, as an example when dancers attune their movements to those of a companion. Temporal synchronization inside a joint action is usually assessed based on measurements of “asynchronies” or timing deviations 
among individuals (Mills et al., 2015). Experimental research within the typical healthy population demonstrates a strong connection involving the good quality of temporal IPS in (musical) joint action and experiences connected to social cohesion (Marsh et al., 2009), cooperation (Anshel and Kipper, 1988; Wiltermuth and Heath, 2009), bonding and attachment (Hove and Risen, 2009; Wheatley et al., 2012). As for the BPD population, men and women appear to cooperate significantly less in an experimentally manipulated interpersonal context than do controls (Lazarus et al., 2014). Further, BPD men and women are likely to have much more difficulties in repair ofFrontiers in Psychology www.frontiersin.orgApril 2017 Volume 8 ArticleFoubert et al.Interpersonal Synchronization in BPDrelationship ruptures than controls (King-Casas et al., 2008). Ruptures in cooperation appear to be linked with diminished trust within the interacting companion (Seres et al., 2009; Unoka et al., 2009). Ultimately, oxytocin, a neuropeptide identified to boost cooperation and prosocial behavior for example in musical joint action (e.g., Grape et al., 2002), may have paradoxical effects for BPD folks. By way of example, a study of Bartz et al. (2010) showed that intranasal administration of oxytocin didn’t have its regular trust facilitating effects in response to a hypothetical partner cooperation in BPD folks. From a order GSK0660 theoretical viewpoint, BPD is ordinarily characterized by disturbed attachment (Agrawal et al., 2004; Gunderson and Lyons-Ruth, 2008; Beeney et al., PubMed ID:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/2138861 2016). In accordance with attachment theory (Bowlby, 1988), the good quality of relationships, such as measured by child-caregiver IPS, results inside the improvement of mental representations, such as beliefs abou.