Reputation in an economic game modulates premotor cortex activity during action observation

Our interactions with other people – and our processing of their actions – are shaped by their reputation. Research has identified an Action Observation Network (AON) which is engaged when observing other people's actions. Yet, little is known about how the processing of others’ actions is influenced by another's reputation. Is the response of the AON modulated by the reputation of the actor? We developed a variant of the ultimatum game in which participants watched either the visible or occluded actions of two ‘proposers’. These actions were tied to decisions of how to split a pot of money although the proposers’ decisions on each trial were not known to participants when observing the actions. One proposer made fair offers on the majority of trials, establishing a positive reputation, whereas the other made predominantly, unfair offers resulting in a negative reputation. We found significant activations in two regions of the left dorsal premotor cortex (dPMC). The first of these showed a main effect of reputation with greater activation for the negative reputation proposer than the positive reputation proposer. Furthermore individual differences in trust ratings of the two proposers covaried with activation in the right primary motor cortex (M1). The second showed an interaction between visibility and reputation driven by a greater effect of reputation when participants were observing an occluded action. Our findings show that the processing of others’ actions in the AON is modulated by an actor's reputation, and suggest a predictive role for the PMC during action observation

Understanding the Goals of Everyday Instrumental Actions Is Primarily Linked to Object, Not Motor-Kinematic, Information: Evidence from fMRI

Prior research conceptualised action understanding primarily as a kinematic matching of observed actions to own motor representations but has ignored the role of object information. The current study utilized fMRI to identify (a) regions uniquely involved in encoding the goal of others' actions, and (b) to test whether these goal understanding processes draw more strongly on regions involved in encoding object semantics or movement kinematics. Participants watched sequences of instrumental actions while attending to either the actions' goal (goal task), the movements performed (movement task) or the objects used (object task). The results confirmed, first, a unique role of the inferior frontal gyrus, middle temporal gyrus and medial frontal gyrus in action goal understanding. Second, they show for the first time that activation in the goal task overlaps directly with object- but not movement-related activation. Moreover, subsequent parametric analyses revealed that movement-related regions become activated only when goals are unclear, or observers have little action experience. In contrast to motor theories of action understanding, these data suggest that objects-rather than movement kinematics-carry the key information about others' actions. Kinematic information is additionally recruited when goals are ambiguous or unfamiliar

One step ahead: Investigating the influence of prior knowledge on the perception of others’ actions

Historically, a dominant view has been that we understand others by directly matching their actions to our own motor system, emphasising the importance of bottom-up processes during social perception. However, more recent theories suggest that instead we actively anticipate others actions based upon intentions inferred outside of the motor system, from social cues such as language, eye gaze and object information. Across 13 experiments, the established representational momentum paradigm, as well as a cross-modal visuotactile paradigm were employed to test the hypothesis that people’s perceptual processes while observing the actions of others would be affected by such top-down cues about the actor’s intentions. We found, first, that people overestimate other people’s actions in the direction of motion. Importantly, these overestimations were directly influenced by social cues. Saying or hearing a word congruent with a subsequently observed action resulted in the action being perceived as further along its trajectory. Second, we found that people anticipate the tactile outcomes of other people’s actions with their own sensory tactile systems but that the mechanisms differed for bottom-up and top-down driven predictions. In a task in which people had to detect tactile stimulation while watching others, seeing impending hand-object contact increased the bias to perceive tactile stimulation, even when there was none, while impending contact that could not be seen but only inferred increased tactile sensitivity. These findings are discussed in the context of recent theories of top-down predictive processing during social perception and from the perspective of multisensory integration

Change blindness: eradication of gestalt strategies

Arrays of eight, texture-defined rectangles were used as stimuli in a one-shot change blindness (CB) task where there was a 50% chance that one rectangle would change orientation between two successive presentations separated by an interval. CB was eliminated by cueing the target rectangle in the first stimulus, reduced by cueing in the interval and unaffected by cueing in the second presentation. This supports the idea that a representation was formed that persisted through the interval before being 'overwritten' by the second presentation (Landman et al, 2003 Vision Research 43149–164]. Another possibility is that participants used some kind of grouping or Gestalt strategy. To test this we changed the spatial position of the rectangles in the second presentation by shifting them along imaginary spokes (by ±1 degree) emanating from the central fixation point. There was no significant difference seen in performance between this and the standard task [F(1,4)=2.565, p=0.185]. This may suggest two things: (i) Gestalt grouping is not used as a strategy in these tasks, and (ii) it gives further weight to the argument that objects may be stored and retrieved from a pre-attentional store during this task

Neural and motor basis of inter-individual interactions

The goal of my Ph.D. work was to investigate the behavioral markers and the brain activities responsible for the emergence of sensorimotor communication. Sensorimotor communication can be defined as a form of communication consisting into flexible exchanges based on bodily signals, in order to increase the efficiency of the inter-individual coordination. For instance, a soccer player carving his movements to inform another player about his intention. This form of interaction is highly dependent of the motor system and the ability to produce appropriate movements but also of the ability of the partner to decode these cues. To tackle these facets of human social interaction, we approached the complexity of the problem by splitting my research activities into two separate lines of research. First, we pursued the examination of motor-based humans\u2019 capability to perceive and \u201cread\u201d other\u2019s behaviors in focusing on single-subject experiment. The discovery of mirror neurons in monkey premotor cortex in the early nineties (di Pellegrino et al. 1992) motivated a number of human studies on this topic (Rizzolatti and Craighero 2004). The critical finding was that some ventral premotor neurons are engaged during visual presentation of actions performed by conspecifics. More importantly, those neurons were shown to encode also the actual execution of similar actions (i.e. irrespective of who the acting individual is). This phenomenon has been highly investigated in humans by using cortical and cortico-spinal measures (for review see, fMRI: Molenberghs, Cunnington, and Mattingley 2012; TMS: Naish et al. 2014; EEG: Pineda 2008). During single pulse TMS (over the primary motor cortex), the amplitude of motor evoked potentials (MEPs) provides an index of corticospinal recruitment. During action observation the modulation of this index follow the expected changes during action execution (Fadiga et al. 1995). However, dozens of studies have been published on this topic and revealed important inconsistencies. For instance, MEPs has been shown to be dependent on observed low-level motor features (e.g. kinematic features or electromyography temporal coupling; Gangitano, Mottaghy, and Pascual-Leone 2001; Borroni et al. 2005; Cavallo et al. 2012) as well as high level movement properties (e.g. action goals; Cattaneo et al. 2009; Cattaneo et al. 2013). Furthermore, MEPs modulations do not seem to be related to the observed effectors (Borroni and Baldissera 2008; Finisguerra et al. 2015; Senna, Bolognini, and Maravita 2014), suggesting their independence from low-level movement features. These contradictions call for new paradigms. Our starting hypothesis here is that the organization and function of the mirror mechanism should follow that of the motor system during action execution. Hence, we derived three action observation protocols from classical motor control theories: 1) The first study was motivated by the fact that motor redundancy in action execution do not allow the presence of a one-to-one mapping between (single) muscle activation and action goals. Based on that, we showed that the effect of action observation (observation of an actor performing a power versus a precision grasp) are variable at the single muscle level (MEPs; motor evoked potentials) but robust when evaluating the kinematic of TMS-evoked movements. Considering that movements are based on the coordination of multiple muscle activations (muscular synergies), MEPs may represent a partial picture of the real corticospinal activation. Inversely, movement kinematics is both the final functional byproduct of muscles coordination and the sole visual feedback that can be extracted from action observation (i.e. muscle recruitment is not visible). We conclude that TMS-evoked kinematics may be more reliable in representing the state of the motor system during action observation. 2) In the second study, we exploited the inter-subject variability inherent to everyday whole-body human actions, to evaluate the link between individual motor signatures (or motor styles) and other\u2019s action perception. We showed no group-level effect but a robust correlation between the individual motor signature recorded during action execution and the subsequent modulations of corticospinal excitability during action observation. However, results were at odds with a strict version of the direct matching hypothesis that would suggest the opposite pattern. In fact, the more the actor\u2019s movement was similar to the observer\u2019s individual motor signature, the smaller was the MEPs amplitude, and vice versa. These results conform to the predictive coding hypothesis, suggesting that during AO, the motor system compares our own way of doing the action (individual motor signature) with the action displayed on the screen (actor\u2019s movement). 3) In the third study, we investigated the neural mechanisms underlying the visual perception of action mistakes. According to a strict version of the direct matching hypothesis, the observer should potentially reproduce the neural activation present during the actual execution of action errors (van Schie et al. 2004). Here, instead of observing an increase of cortical inhibition, we showed an early (120 ms) decrease of intracortical inhibition (short intracortical inhibition) when a mismatch was present between the observed action (erroneous) and the observer\u2019s expectation. As proposed by the predictive coding framework, the motor system may be involved in the generation of an error signal potentially relying on an early decrease of intracortical inhibition within the corticomotor system. The second line of research aimed at the investigation of how sensorimotor communication flows between agents engaged in a complementary action coordination task. In this regard, measures of interest where related to muscle activity and/or kinematics as the recording of TMS-related indexes would be too complicated in a joint-action scenario. 1) In the first study, we exploited the known phenomenon of Anticipatory Postural Adjustments (APAs). APAs refers to postural adjustments made in anticipation of a self- or externally-generated disturbance in order to cope for the predicted perturbation and stabilize the current posture. Here we examined how observing someone else lifting an object we hold can affect our own anticipatory postural adjustments of the arm. We showed that the visual information alone (joint action condition), in the absence of efference copy (present only when the subject is unloading by himself the object situated on his hand), were not sufficient to fully deploy the needed anticipatory muscular activations. Rather, action observation elicited a dampened APA response that is later augmented by the arrival of tactile congruent feedback. 2) In a second study, we recorded the kinematic of orchestra musicians (one conductor and two lines of violinists). A manipulation was added to perturb the normal flow of information conveyed by the visual channel. The first line of violinist where rotated 180\ub0, and thus faced the second line. Several techniques were used to extract inter-group (Granger Causality method) and intra-group synchronization (PCA for musicians and autoregression for conductors). The analyses were directed to two kinematic features, hand and head movements, which are central for functionally different action. The hand is essential for instrumental actions, whereas head movements encode ancillary expressive actions. During the perturbation, we observed a complete reshaping of the whole patterns of communication going in the direction of a distribution of the leadership between conductor and violinists, especially for what regards head movements. In fact, in the perturbed condition, the second line acts as an informational hub connecting the first line to the conductor they no longer can see. This study evidences different forms of communications (coordination versus synchronization) flowing via different channels (ancillary versus instrumental) with different time-scales

Visual Cortex

The neurosciences have experienced tremendous and wonderful progress in many areas, and the spectrum encompassing the neurosciences is expansive. Suffice it to mention a few classical fields: electrophysiology, genetics, physics, computer sciences, and more recently, social and marketing neurosciences. Of course, this large growth resulted in the production of many books. Perhaps the visual system and the visual cortex were in the vanguard because most animals do not produce their own light and offer thus the invaluable advantage of allowing investigators to conduct experiments in full control of the stimulus. In addition, the fascinating evolution of scientific techniques, the immense productivity of recent research, and the ensuing literature make it virtually impossible to publish in a single volume all worthwhile work accomplished throughout the scientific world. The days when a single individual, as Diderot, could undertake the production of an encyclopedia are gone forever. Indeed most approaches to studying the nervous system are valid and neuroscientists produce an almost astronomical number of interesting data accompanied by extremely worthy hypotheses which in turn generate new ventures in search of brain functions. Yet, it is fully justified to make an encore and to publish a book dedicated to visual cortex and beyond. Many reasons validate a book assembling chapters written by active researchers. Each has the opportunity to bind together data and explore original ideas whose fate will not fall into the hands of uncompromising reviewers of traditional journals. This book focuses on the cerebral cortex with a large emphasis on vision. Yet it offers the reader diverse approaches employed to investigate the brain, for instance, computer simulation, cellular responses, or rivalry between various targets and goal directed actions. This volume thus covers a large spectrum of research even though it is impossible to include all topics in the extremely diverse field of neurosciences