Advertisement

Automatic attribution of social coordination information to chasing scenes: evidence from mu suppression

  • 173 Accesses

  • 1 Citations

Abstract

This study explored whether social coordination information that extends beyond individual goals is attributed to impoverished movements produced by simple geometric shapes. We manipulated coordination information by presenting two chasers and one common target performing coordinated or individual (i.e., uncoordinated) chases, and measured mu rhythms (electroencephalogram oscillations within the 8–13 Hz range at sensorimotor regions) related to understanding social interactions. We found that although the participants’ task was completely unrelated to processing chasing motion, mu rhythms were more suppressed for coordinated chasing than in the control condition (backward replay for chasing motion), and this effect disappeared for uncoordinated chasing. Moreover, mu suppression increased with higher post-test ratings of social coordination but did not correlate with uncoordinated information. Such effects cannot be explained by general attentional involvement, as there was no difference in attention-related occipital alpha suppression across conditions. These findings are consistent with interpretations of processing coordinated actions, suggesting that our visual system can automatically attribute social coordination information to motion, at least in chasing scenes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 199

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

References

  1. Adams RB (2011) The science of social vision. Oxford University Press, New York

  2. Barrett HC, Todd PM, Miller GF, Blythe PW (2005) Accurate judgments of intention from motion cues alone: a cross-cultural study. Evol Hum Behav 26:313–331

  3. Brainard DH (1997) The psychophysics toolbox. Spat Vis 10:433–436

  4. Canessa N, Alemanno F, Riva F, Zani A, Proverbio AM, Mannara N et al (2012) The neural bases of social intention understanding: the role of interaction goals. PLoS One 7:e4234

  5. Carey S (2009) The origin of concepts. Oxford University Press, New York

  6. Castelli F, Happé F, Frith U, Frith C (2000) Movement and mind: a functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. Neuroimage 12:314–325

  7. Centelles L, Assaiante C, Nazarian B, Anton JL, Schmitz C (2011) Recruitment of both the mirror and the mentalizing networks when observing social interactions depicted by point-lights: a neuroimaging study. PLoS One 6:e15749

  8. Coll MP, Bird G, Catmur C, Press C (2015) Cross-modal repetition effects in the mu rhythm indicate tactile mirroring during action observation. Cortex 63:121–131

  9. Cook R, Bird G, Catmur C, Press C, Heyes C (2014) Mirror neurons: from origin to function. Behav Brain Sci 37:177–192

  10. Csibra G, Bı́ró S, Koós O, Gergely G (2003) One-year-old infants use teleological representations of actions productively. Cogn Sci 27:111–133

  11. Fox NA, Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ, Yoo KH, Bowman LC, Cannon EN et al (2016) Assessing human mirror activity with EEG mu rhythm: a meta-analysis. Psychol Bull 142:291–313

  12. Frischen A, Bayliss AP, Tipper SP (2007) Gaze cueing of attention: visual attention, social cognition, and individual differences. Psychol Bull 133:694–724

  13. Gao T, Newman GE, Scholl BJ (2009) The psychophysics of chasing: a case study in the perception of animacy. Cogn Psychol 59:154–179

  14. Gao T, McCarthy G, Scholl BJ (2010) The wolfpack effect: perception of animacy irresistibly influences interactive behavior. Psychol Sci 21:1845–1853

  15. Gao T, Scholl BJ, McCarthy G (2012) Dissociating the detection of intentionality from animacy in the right posterior superior temporal sulcus. J Neurosci 32:14276–14280

  16. Gergely G, Nádasdy Z, Csibra G, Bíró S (1995) Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition 56:165–193

  17. Heider F, Simmel M (1944) An experimental study of apparent behavior. Am J Psychol 57:243–259

  18. Hobson HM, Bishop DVM (2016) Mu suppression—a good measure of the human mirror neuron system? Cortex 82:290–310

  19. Hoenen M, Lübke KT, Pause BM (2016) Non-anthropomorphic robots as social entities on a neurophysiological level. Comput Hum Behav 57:182–186

  20. Iacoboni M (1999) Cortical mechanisms of human imitation. Science 286:2526–2528

  21. Iacoboni M, Molnar-Szakacs I, Gallese V, Buccino G, Mazziotta JC (2005) Grasping the intentions of others with one’s own mirror neuron system. PLoS Biol 3:e79

  22. Jacob P, Jeannerod M (2005) The motor theory of social cognition: a critique. Trends Cogn Sci 9:21–25

  23. Klimesch W (2012) Alpha-band oscillations, attention, and controlled access to stored information. Trends Cogn Sci 16:606–617

  24. Klimesch W, Doppelmayr M, Russegger H, Pachinger T, Schwaiger J (1998) Induced alpha band power changes in the human EEG and attention. Neurosci Lett 244:73–76

  25. Klimesch W, Sauseng P, Hanslmayr S (2007) EEG alpha oscillations: the inhibition-timing hypothesis. Brain Res Rev 53:63–88

  26. Knoblich G, Sebanz N (2008) Evolving intentions for social interaction: from entrainment to joint action. Philos Trans R Soc B 363:2021–2031

  27. Maris E, Oostenveld R (2007) Nonparametric statistical testing of EEG-and MEG-data. J Neurosci Meth 164:177–190

  28. Muthukumaraswamy SD, Johnson BW (2004) Primary motor cortex activation during action observation revealed by wavelet analysis of the EEG. Clin Neurophysiol 115:1760–1766

  29. Muthukumaraswamy SD, Singh KD (2008) Modulation of the human mirror neuron system during cognitive activity. Psychophysiology 45:896–905

  30. Muthukumaraswamy SD, Johnson BW, McNair NA (2004) Mu rhythm modulation during observation of an object-directed grasp. Cogn Brain Res 19:195–201

  31. Naeem M, Prasad G, Watson DR, Kelso JAS (2012) Electrophysiological signatures of intentional social coordination in the 10–12 Hz range. NeuroImage 59:1795–1803

  32. Neri P, Luu JY, Levi DM (2006) Meaningful interactions can enhance visual discrimination of human agents. Nat Neurosci 9:1186–1192

  33. Oberman LM, McCleery JP, Ramachandran VS, Pineda JA (2007a) EEG evidence for mirror neuron activity during the observation of human and robot actions: toward an analysis of the human qualities of interactive robots. Neurocomputing 70:2194–2203

  34. Oberman LM, Pineda JA, Ramachandran VS (2007b) The human mirror neuron system: a link between action observation and social skills. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci 2:62–66

  35. Oostenveld R, Fries P, Maris E, Schoffelen J-M (2011) FieldTrip: open source software for advanced analysis of MEG, EEG, and invasive electrophysiological data. Comput Intel Neurosci 2011:156869

  36. Parsons LM, Fox PT, Downs JH, Glass T, Hirsch TB, Martin CC et al (1995) Use of implicit motor imagery for visual shape discrimination as revealed by PET. Nature 375:54–58

  37. Perry A, Troje NF, Bentin S (2010) Exploring motor system contributions to the perception of social information: evidence from EEG activity in the mu/alpha frequency range. Soc Neurosci 5:272–284

  38. Perry A, Stein L, Bentin S (2011) Motor and attentional mechanisms involved in social interaction—evidence from mu and alpha EEG suppression. NeuroImage 58:895–904

  39. Pineda JA (2005) The functional significance of mu rhythms: translating “seeing” and “hearing” into “doing”. Brain Res Rev 50:57–68

  40. Quadflieg S, Gentile F, Rossion B (2015) The neural basis of perceiving person interactions. Cortex 70:5–20

  41. Rawal A, Rajagopalan P, Miikkulainen R (2010) Constructing competitive and cooperative agent behavior using coevolution. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE Conference on Computational Intelligence and Games. CIG2010, pp 107–114

  42. Rizzolatti G, Craighero L (2004) The mirror-neuron system. Annu Rev Neurosci 27:169–192

  43. Scholl BJ, Gao T (2013) Perceiving animacy and intentionality: Visual processing or higher-level judgment. In: Rutherford MD, Kuhlmeier VA (eds) Social perception: detection and interpretation of animacy, agency, and intention. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 197–229

  44. Scholl BJ, Tremoulet PD (2000) Perceptual causality and animacy. Trends Cogn Sci 4:299–309

  45. Sebanz N, Bekkering H, Knoblich G (2006) Joint action: bodies and minds moving together. Trends Cogn Sci 10:70–76

  46. Semlitsch HV, Anderer P, Schuster P, Presslich O (1986) A solution for reliable and valid reduction of ocular artifacts, applied to the P300 ERP. Psychophysiology 23:695–703

  47. Southgate V, Johnson MH, El Karoui I, Csibra G (2010) Motor system activation reveals infants’ on-line prediction of others’ goals. Psychol Sci 21:355–359

  48. Streltsova A, Berchio C, Gallese V, Umilta’ MA (2010) Time course and specificity of sensory-motor alpha modulation during the observation of hand motor acts and gestures: a high density EEG study. Exp Brain Res 205:363–373

  49. Todd JT (2004) The visual perception of 3D shape. Trends Cogn Sci 8:115–121

  50. Tognoli E, Lagarde J, DeGuzman GC, Kelso JAS (2007) The phi complex as a neuromarker of human social coordination. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:8190–8195

  51. Ullman T, Baker CL, Macindoe O, Evans O, Goodman ND, Tenenbaum JB (2009) Help or hinder: Bayesian models of social goal inference. In: Bengio Y et al (eds) Advances in neural information processing systems 22. NIPS Foundation, Vancouver

  52. Ulloa ER, Pineda JA (2007) Recognition of point-light biological motion: mu rhythms and mirror neuron activity. Behav Brain Res 183:188–194

  53. Yin J, Ding X, Zhou J, Shui R, Li X, Shen M (2013) Social grouping: perceptual grouping of objects by cooperative but not competitive relationships in dynamic chase. Cognition 129:194–204

  54. Yin J, Xu H, Ding X, Liang J, Shui R, Shen M (2016) Social constraints from an observer’s perspective: coordinated actions make an agent’s position more predictable. Cognition 151:10–17

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 31600871), and K. C. Wong Magna Fund of Ningbo University.

Author information

Correspondence to Jun Yin.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (AVI 177 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (AVI 182 kb)

Supplementary material 3 (AVI 177 kb)

Supplementary material 4 (AVI 166 kb)

Supplementary material 1 (AVI 177 kb)

Supplementary material 2 (AVI 182 kb)

Supplementary material 3 (AVI 177 kb)

Supplementary material 4 (AVI 166 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Duan, J., Yang, Z., He, X. et al. Automatic attribution of social coordination information to chasing scenes: evidence from mu suppression. Exp Brain Res 236, 117–127 (2018) doi:10.1007/s00221-017-5111-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Automatic attribution
  • Coordination information
  • Chasing scene
  • Mu suppression