1 / 61

Human Social Interaction perspectives from neuroscience

1. Human Social Interaction perspectives from neuroscience. Dr. Roger Newport Room B47 Student Drop-in: Tuesdays 12-2 www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn roger.newport@nottingham.ac.uk. Understanding Action: social visual cues and biological motion. This lecture:

roanna-cox
Download Presentation

Human Social Interaction perspectives from neuroscience

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. 1 Human Social Interaction perspectives from neuroscience Dr. Roger Newport Room B47 Student Drop-in: Tuesdays 12-2 www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn roger.newport@nottingham.ac.uk Understanding Action: social visual cues and biological motion

  2. This lecture: Your marks and stuff Part 1 - Social visual cues - the importance of eye gaze Part 2 - Social visual cues - detecting human motion

  3. I Went to church last Sunday She passed me on by I knew her mind was changing By the roving of her eye

  4. Understanding actions: The head and eyes 2 The face is the most important object that we see every day. The face provides information about: identity perceived personality emotional state The eyes provide information about: direction of attention emotion intention social status social rules romantic attraction corriedoo Low-gazing females are rated as less-attractive by males Objects that are gazed at by attractive people are rated as more desirable Within the face the eyes are the most important feature.

  5. 5a The eyes - models of eye gaze processing ID - primitive mechanism that interprets motion in terms of desires & goals EDD- detects eye-like stimuli & works out direction of gaze. Attributes ‘seeing’ to the owner SAM - links above 2 & identifies when you and other are looking at same thing TOMM - infers mental states ID Intentionality Detector EDD Eye direction Detector SAM Shared Attention Mechanism TOMM Theory of Mind Mechanism Baron-Cohen

  6. 5b The eyes - models of eye gaze processing A: L and T looking at each other vs not B: L detects that T is not looking at them and follows B’s gaze C: L&T looking at same thing D: Combination of A and C - both know that they are both looking at the same thing E: Inferring intentions using a combination of D and higher order mechanisms Emery

  7. 4 Farroni et al., 2006. Eye gaze processing: an innate skill? By 4 months infants Prefer direct to averted gaze Can follow gaze Will orient more rapidly to a location cued by an adult Babies (1-5 days old) prefer to look at upright straight head direct gaze vs. others A primitive configuration mechanism?

  8. An evolutionary advantage for efficient gaze processing 6 The eye as a special stimulus. Response of cells in striate cortex.

  9. Psychophysical evidence for a specialised eye detection system 7 Various mammals have developed specialised systems for detecting eye-like stimuli Fast Slower Rapid detection and reaction to predators

  10. Human psychophysical evidence for a specialised eye detection system Automatic and obligatory processing of gaze 8

  11. 9 --> + + + + + + + Different types of attention shift * @ @ @ Covert pull Covert push Overt

  12. Gaze cuing - automatic processing of gaze shifts in others 10 Ristic and Kingstone, 2004

  13. Eye gaze processing is special. Hietanen et al., 2006 1 Systems active for arrows different to those for gaze.

  14. Where in the brain? Evidence for STS involvement: animal studies 10 Monkey cell gaze preference Neurophysiological responses from cells in the superior temporal sulcus of the macaque to indirect and direct eye contact of conspecifics (adapted from Perrett & Mistlin, 1990). Perrett, D.I. et al. (1985)

  15. Evidence for STS involvement: Monkey lesion studies 11 Eye gaze processing is impaired following STS lesions Unable to make gaze-direction judgements, but unimpaired on other face processing tasks. Various Perrett et al., studies

  16. STS activation in humans 12 From Allison, 2000 Wicker PET averted vs. mutual gaze videos H&H fMRI static images Puce fMRI alternating static gaze STS, but not MT

  17. Evidence for STS involvement: Human imaging studies 13 Kingstone et al., 2004

  18. Hietanen et al., 2006 Why no STS activation? 14 Subtracting neutral from cued removes STS activation

  19. Evidence from Autism 15 Which sweet does Charlie prefer? Which one is looking at you? Autistic children have difficulty using gaze information to interpret the intentions of others. Any evidence related to STS activity?…

  20. Evidence from Autism 16 Pelphrey et al., 2005 Eye gaze related (A&B) and incongruence related (C&D) STS activity N A

  21. Human neuropsychological evidence: Patient MJ - a rare STG lesion Look it up yourself et al., 2006 17

  22. 18

  23. Gaze is not the only cue to social attention 19

  24. Psychophysical studies of other visual social cues 20

  25. Animal SCR studies 21 Rolls et al.

  26. 22

  27. 23 B-C’s EDD Perrett’s DAD ID Intentionality Detector EDD Eye direction Detector SAM Shared Attention Mechanism TOMM Theory of Mind Mechanism

  28. 24 Human psycho-phyiscs Congruent v incongruent head and eyes Task, to indicate eye direction regardless of head and vice versa Does this fit Perrett’s DAD? C I C I

  29. Eyes Summary 25 There are various facial visual cues that can inform us about the direction of attention of others Of these they direction of gaze seems to be the most readily detectable Although gaze may be the most important, gaze alone is not sufficient to tell us about another’s direction of attention Cues from eye, body and head direction are possibly processed in parallel All this seems to be processed in the STS This information should be taken into account when designing models of social behaviour

  30. 1 Human Social Interaction perspectives from neuroscience Dr. Roger Newport Room 331 Office Hours: Tuesdays 10-12 www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/rwn Understanding Action: biological motion

  31. biological and non-biological motion 11

  32. What is special about Biological motion? 2 Goes beyond facial expressions and social attention cues: Actions often used for social communication Actions involve movement Detection of biological movement (i.e. of animals) important for survival Evolutionary advantage often = specialised neural network Innate skill? ability from 3 months. Biological motion Non-biological motion

  33. What is special about Biological motion 3 Goes beyond facial expressions and social attention cues: From bio motion we can perceive: Identity (face/body movement) Gender Attractiveness Affect Intentions Social intentions BMLwalker

  34. BML Walker

  35. Ways of studying biological motion 4 Observing point-light displays Observing real vs robot http://www.biomotionlab.ca/Demos/BMLwalker.html

  36. Ways of studying biological motion 5 Types of point-light stimuli used in studies Scrambled, inverted and normal Motion http://www.psy.vanderbilt.edu/faculty/blake/BM/BioMot.html

  37. Evidence from monkey studies (mainly Perrett et al.) 7 Cells in superior temporal polysensory (STP) cortex in monkeys receive inputs from dorsal (action) and ventral (perception) streams (integrating form and motion). Such inputs would allow the detection of form from motion. Some cells in STP respond selectively to biological motion. Perrett studied 50 ‘hand action’ STS cells as monkeys viewed various human hand movements (1) Most cells responded best to particular movement type (e.g. grasping vs. retrieving action. (2) Responsiveness for that action generalized across objects (3) Responsiveness generalized across various ways of making the same action (e.g. fast versus slow, near versus far (4) Responsiveness was greater when the action was goal-directed; Cells therefore encode particular goal-directed hand actions.

  38. Human imaging studies Up to 2000 only 8 Many left STS/IPS but also right STS

  39. Human imaging studies 9 Grezes et al. 2001 STS activation Red = walker Green = cube Both = yellow Note bio always more anterior than nonbio Left IPS non-rigid bio motion Random dots drifting left or right Random dot cube rotating left or right Random dot cube rotating left or right with masking elements Upright point-light walker facing left or right Inverted point-light walker facing left or right Upright point-light walker facing left or right with masking elements Inverted point-light walker facing left or right with masking elements NB masked inverted BM not detected in behavioural task

  40. Human imaging studies 10 Activation in this subject is bilateral, but most subjects showed a right hemisphere bias Grossman and Blake, 2001 Posterior STS Bio>Inverted Inverted>scrambled Bio>imagined

  41. Human imaging studies - difference between motion sensitive and Bio motion sensitive areas 11 Beauchamp et al. 2002

  42. 12

  43. 13 (A) Grand averaged ERPs across 12 subjects elicited by biological (blue) and scrambled (red) motion. (B) Scalp distribution of ERP difference amplitudes (ERP amplitude in bio motion condition minus scrambled motion). Clear differences (increased activation) observed after 200 ms in right occipitotemporal region (STS probably) 200ms after stimulus onset

More Related