A Coupled Oscillator Model of Interactive Tapping

Background: Synchronization in music has been a popular experimental basis for studying social interactions, as musicians are required to synchronize to each other’s beats and integrate abstract social information in order to coordinate their actions as part of a non-verbal communication process. A finger-tapping paradigm has been used in studies of sensorimotor synchronization as well as coordination dynamics within and between people (Repp 2005). Recent models of tapping dynamics have included two error-correction mechanisms: phase and period correction (Repp & Keller). They have generally been linear models, which are oversimplifications of these dynamics. Aims: To model the dynamics capturing entrainment between pairs in a finger-tapping paradigm. Method: Pairs of subjects were asked to tap on their respective keyboards following an 8-beat auditory stimulus sent through their headphones. Subjects were instructed to keep the given beat as precisely as possible as well as synchronize with the ‘other’. They were in scenarios where they received auditory feedback of themselves tapping, the other, or the computer metronome. Results: A dynamical systems approach was taken to model the tapping dynamics, using a system of two oscillators coupled in both phase and frequency, corresponding to phase and period correction. The model demonstrated that the tapping dynamics depend on the four coupling constants (phase and frequency for each oscillator), and are highly sensitive to noise. Conclusions: Both phase and frequency coupling is required to capture the tapping dynamics of dyads. Coupling constants can be used to capture the degree of interaction.

[1]  B. Repp Sensorimotor synchronization: A review of the tapping literature , 2005, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[2]  Peter E Keller,et al.  Sensorimotor synchronization with adaptively timed sequences. , 2008, Human movement science.

[3]  R. Schmidt,et al.  A comparison of intra- and interpersonal interlimb coordination: coordination breakdowns and coupling strength. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  B. Repp,et al.  Pianists duet better when they play with themselves: On the possible role of action simulation in synchronization , 2007, Consciousness and Cognition.

[5]  Michael J. Richardson,et al.  Rocking together: dynamics of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination. , 2007, Human movement science.

[6]  Dirk Vorberg,et al.  Linear phase-correction in synchronization: predictions, parameter estimation, and simulations , 2002 .

[7]  H. Bekkering,et al.  Joint action: bodies and minds moving together , 2006, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[8]  J. Kelso,et al.  Social coordination dynamics: Measuring human bonding , 2008, Social neuroscience.

[9]  Yves Guiard,et al.  Fitts' law in the discrete vs. cyclical paradigm , 1997 .

[10]  Jürgen Kurths,et al.  Synchronization - A Universal Concept in Nonlinear Sciences , 2001, Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series.

[11]  J. A. Scott Kelso,et al.  Reaction-anticipation transitions in human perception-action patterns , 1996 .

[12]  B. Ermentrout,et al.  An adaptive model for synchrony in the firefly Pteroptyx malaccae , 1991 .

[13]  A. Kristofferson,et al.  Response delays and the timing of discrete motor responses , 1973 .

[14]  Daniel Leech-Wilkinson,et al.  European Society for the Cognitive Sciences of Music (ESCOM) , 1991 .

[15]  M. Turvey,et al.  Phase transitions and critical fluctuations in the visual coordination of rhythmic movements between people. , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

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

[17]  Keith Davids,et al.  Coordination dynamics of rhythmical and discrete prehension movements: Implications of the scanning procedure and individual differences , 1998 .