What is the key to successful interaction? Is it sufficient to represent a common goal, or does the way our partner achieves that goal count as well? How do we react when our partner misbehaves? We used a turn-taking music-like task requiring participants to play sequences of notes together with a partner, and we investigated how people adapt to a partner’s error that violates their expectations. Errors consisted of either playing a wrong note of a sequence that the agents were playing together (thus preventing the achievement of the joint goal) or playing the expected note with an unexpected action. In both cases, we found post-error slowing and inaccuracy suggesting the participants’ implicit tendency to correct the partner’s error and produce the action that the partner should have done. We argue that these “joint” monitoring processes depend on the motor predictions made within a (dyadic) motor plan and may represent a basic mechanism for mutual support in motor interactions.

Cooperation triggers expectations on our partners’ contributions to achieve a common goal. A partner, however, may sometimes violate such expectations, driving us to perform immediate adjustments. What neurophysiological mechanisms support these adaptations? We tested the hypothesis of an interaction-specific brain system that can decode a partner’s error and promote adaptive responses when cooperating toward a shared goal. During functional magnetic resonance imaging, the participants played short melodies with a virtual partner by performing one note each in turn-taking. A colored cue indicated which melody they had to execute at each trial, thus generating expectations on what notes the partner would play. The participants also performed the task in a perceptually matched Non-Interactive context. The results showed that task interactivity modulates the brain responses to a partner’s error in dorsal fronto-temporoparietal and medial cingulo-opercular networks. Multivariate pattern analysis revealed that these neural activations reflect deep decoding of the partner’s mistake. Within these networks, the automatic tendency to correct the partner’s errors, as indexed by specific reaction times adaptations, depended on the activity of a right-lateralized fronto-opercular system that may enable mutual support during real-life cooperation. Future studies may unveil the role of this putative “interaction monitoring” brain system in social dysfunctions and their motor foundations.

No abstract

No abstract