Dyadic interaction processing in the posterior temporal cortex

Recent behavioural evidence shows that visual displays of two individuals interacting are not simply encoded as separate individuals, but as an interactive unit that is 'more than the sum of its parts'. Recent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) evidence shows the importance of the posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS) in processing human social interactions, and suggests that it may represent human-object interactions as qualitatively 'greater' than the average of their constituent parts. The current study aimed to investigate whether the pSTS or other posterior temporal lobe region(s): 1) Demonstrated evidence of a dyadic information effect - that is, qualitatively different responses to an interacting dyad than to averaged responses of the same two interactors, presented in isolation, and; 2) Significantly differentiated between different types of social interactions. Multivoxel pattern analysis was performed in which a classifier was trained to differentiate between qualitatively different types of dyadic interactions. Above-chance classification of interactions was observed in 'interaction selective' pSTS-I and extrastriate body area (EBA), but not in other regions of interest (i.e. face-selective STS and mentalizing-selective temporo-parietal junction). A dyadic information effect was not observed in the pSTS-I, but instead was shown in the EBA; that is, classification of dyadic interactions did not fully generalise to averaged responses to the isolated interactors, indicating that dyadic representations in the EBA contain unique information that cannot be recovered from the interactors presented in isolation. These findings complement previous observations for congruent grouping of human bodies and objects in the broader lateral occipital temporal cortex area.

[1]  R. Saxe,et al.  Development of the social brain from age three to twelve years , 2018, Nature Communications.

[2]  Nikolaas N. Oosterhof,et al.  CoSMoMVPA: multi-modal multivariate pattern analysis of neuroimaging data in Matlab/GNU Octave , 2016 .

[3]  Russell A. Epstein,et al.  Neural Representations of Observed Actions Generalize across Static and Dynamic Visual Input , 2017, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  T. Poggio,et al.  Cognitive neuroscience: Neural mechanisms for the recognition of biological movements , 2003, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[5]  D. Perrett,et al.  A region of right posterior superior temporal sulcus responds to observed intentional actions , 2004, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  N. Kanwisher,et al.  Perceiving social interactions in the posterior superior temporal sulcus , 2017, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[7]  Kami Koldewyn,et al.  Neural responses to visually observed social interactions , 2018, Neuropsychologia.

[8]  Alice J. O'Toole,et al.  The neural representation of faces and bodies in motion and at rest , 2014, NeuroImage.

[9]  Rainer Goebel,et al.  Information-based functional brain mapping. , 2006, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[10]  Brian J Scholl,et al.  Dissociating the Detection of Intentionality from Animacy in the Right Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus , 2012, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[11]  Sharon L. Thompson-Schill,et al.  A meta-analysis of fMRI decoding: Quantifying influences on human visual population codes , 2016, Neuropsychologia.

[12]  P. Downing,et al.  The lateral occipitotemporal cortex in action , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[13]  Béatrice de Gelder,et al.  Tease or threat? Judging social interactions from bodily expressions , 2010, NeuroImage.

[14]  Glyn W. Humphreys,et al.  Action relationships concatenate representations of separate objects in the ventral visual system , 2010, NeuroImage.

[15]  G. Orban,et al.  Specificity of regions processing biological motion , 2005, The European journal of neuroscience.

[16]  T. Allison,et al.  Functional anatomy of biological motion perception in posterior temporal cortex: an FMRI study of eye, mouth and hand movements. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[17]  Karl J. Friston,et al.  Activation in Posterior Superior Temporal Sulcus Parallels Parameter Inducing the Percept of Animacy , 2005, Neuron.

[18]  Alfonso Caramazza,et al.  Action categories in lateral occipitotemporal cortex are organized along sociality and transitivity. , 2016, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[19]  Salvador Soto-Faraco,et al.  The Two-Body Inversion Effect , 2017, Psychological science.

[20]  Pascal Boyer,et al.  How the brain perceives causality: an event-related fMRI study , 2001, Neuroreport.

[21]  S. Quadflieg,et al.  The neuroscience of people watching: how the human brain makes sense of other people's encounters , 2017, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Roel M. Willems,et al.  Cerebral lateralization of face-selective and body-selective visual areas depends on handedness. , 2010, Cerebral cortex.

[23]  Alison J. Wiggett,et al.  The role of the extrastriate body area in action perception , 2006, Social neuroscience.

[24]  Daniel D. Dilks,et al.  Differential selectivity for dynamic versus static information in face-selective cortical regions , 2011, NeuroImage.

[25]  Marius V. Peelen,et al.  Transformation from independent to integrative coding of multi-object arrangements in human visual cortex , 2017, NeuroImage.

[26]  Natacha S. Santos,et al.  Perceiving nonverbal behavior: Neural correlates of processing movement fluency and contingency in dyadic interactions , 2014, Human brain mapping.

[27]  Nikolaus Kriegeskorte,et al.  Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience Systems Neuroscience , 2022 .

[28]  M. Brass,et al.  Investigating Action Understanding: Inferential Processes versus Action Simulation , 2007, Current Biology.

[29]  R. Blake,et al.  Brain Areas Involved in Perception of Biological Motion , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[30]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  An algorithmic method for functionally defining regions of interest in the ventral visual pathway , 2012, NeuroImage.

[31]  S. Tipper,et al.  Bound together: Social binding leads to faster processing, spatial distortion, and enhanced memory of interacting partners. , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[32]  Nancy Kanwisher,et al.  Functional Organization of Social Perception and Cognition in the Superior Temporal Sulcus , 2015, Cerebral cortex.

[33]  Brian J. Scholl,et al.  The psychophysics of chasing: A case study in the perception of animacy , 2009, Cognitive Psychology.

[34]  Kevin A. Pelphrey,et al.  Grasping the Intentions of Others: The Perceived Intentionality of an Action Influences Activity in the Superior Temporal Sulcus during Social Perception , 2004, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[35]  R. Blake,et al.  Brain activity evoked by inverted and imagined biological motion , 2001, Vision Research.

[36]  Luca Turella,et al.  MEG Multivariate Analysis Reveals Early Abstract Action Representations in the Lateral Occipitotemporal Cortex , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[37]  Christopher Baldassano,et al.  Human‐Object Interactions Are More than the Sum of Their Parts , 2016, Cerebral cortex.

[38]  Katie L. H. Gray,et al.  Social Interaction Contexts Bias the Perceived Expressions of Interactants , 2017, Emotion.