Physiological Synchrony Revealed by Delayed Coincidence Count: Application to a Cooperative Complex Environment

Synchrony at the physiological level is an objective measure that can be used to investigate cooperation between human agents. This physiological synchrony has been experimentally observed in different dyadic contexts through measures of the autonomous system such as cardiac measures. Various metrics are used to characterize synchrony between participants such as cross-correlation, weighted coherence, or cross recurrence quantification analysis and with a wide variety of paradigms. We propose the delayed coincidence count as a new method for assessing cardiac synchrony. Delayed coincidence count has already been used to characterize synchrony in firing neurons populations. While being straightforward and computationally light, this method has already been formally proven to be statistically robust. A complex dynamic microworld is designed with two difficulty levels and two cooperation conditions. A total of 40 participants, i.e., 20 teams, voluntarily has conducted the experiment. The delayed coincidence count method (with a coincidence threshold $\delta$ of 20 ms) reveals a significant synchrony ($p < . 01$) during the cooperative and high difficulty condition only, while the other methods did not. The results are interpreted in terms of interaction intensity in accordance with recent literature.

[1]  E. Ferrer,et al.  Dynamical systems modeling of physiological coregulation in dyadic interactions. , 2013, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[2]  Matthew S. Goodwin,et al.  Interpersonal Autonomic Physiology: A Systematic Review of the Literature , 2017, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[3]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Effects of visual and verbal interaction on unintentional interpersonal coordination. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[5]  M. C. Gil,et al.  Social-physiological compliance as a determinant of team performance. , 2001, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[6]  Vsevolod Peysakhovich,et al.  Pilot Flying and Pilot Monitoring’s Aircraft State Awareness During Go-Around Execution in Aviation: A Behavioral and Eye Tracking Study , 2017 .

[7]  J. Gottman,et al.  Marital interaction: physiological linkage and affective exchange. , 1983, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  Robert Henning,et al.  SOCIAL-PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGICAL COMPLIANCE AS A PREDICTOR OF FUTURE TEAM PERFORMANCE , 2005 .

[9]  R. Andridge,et al.  When couples’ hearts beat together: Synchrony in heart rate variability during conflict predicts heightened inflammation throughout the day , 2018, Psychoneuroendocrinology.

[10]  Y. Benjamini,et al.  Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing , 1995 .

[11]  Franck Grammont,et al.  Multiple Tests Based on a Gaussian Approximation of the Unitary Events Method with Delayed Coincidence Count , 2012, Neural Computation.

[12]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Recurrence plots for the analysis of complex systems , 2009 .

[13]  M. Nowak Five Rules for the Evolution of Cooperation , 2006, Science.

[14]  Mohamed Chetouani,et al.  Interpersonal Synchrony: A Survey of Evaluation Methods across Disciplines , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing.

[15]  Kentaro Kodama,et al.  Heart Rate Synchrony in Psychological Counseling: A Case Study , 2018 .

[16]  S. Russell,et al.  Physio-behavioral coupling in a cooperative team task: contributors and relations. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[17]  Adam W. Hoover,et al.  Physiological compliance and team performance. , 2009, Applied ergonomics.

[18]  Weighted Coherence: A More Effective Measure Than Average Coherence , 2003 .

[19]  N. Ravaja,et al.  Physiological Linkage of Dyadic Gaming Experience , 2014 .

[20]  Matthew Pelowski,et al.  Clarifying the interaction types in two-person neuroscience research , 2014, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[21]  C. Paternotte Minimal Cooperation , 2014 .

[22]  G. Keren,et al.  New time-series statistic for detecting rhythmic co-occurrence in the frequency domain: the weighted coherence and its application to psychophysiological research. , 1980, Psychological bulletin.

[23]  J. Cacioppo,et al.  Handbook Of Psychophysiology , 2019 .

[24]  T. Chartrand,et al.  The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[25]  K. Shockley,et al.  Mutual interpersonal postural constraints are involved in cooperative conversation. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[26]  L. Bernardi,et al.  Spontaneous Group Synchronization of Movements and Respiratory Rhythms , 2014, PloS one.

[27]  Jie Xu,et al.  Shared Experiences of Technology and Trust: An Experimental Study of Physiological Compliance Between Active and Passive Users in Technology-Mediated Collaborative Encounters , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[28]  W. Singer,et al.  Neural Synchrony in Cortical Networks: History, Concept and Current Status , 2009, Front. Integr. Neurosci..

[29]  Sonja Grün,et al.  Unitary Events in Multiple Single-Neuron Spiking Activity: I. Detection and Significance , 2002, Neural Computation.

[30]  Guillaume Chanel,et al.  Physiological compliance for social gaming analysis: Cooperative versus competitive play , 2012, Interact. Comput..