A Neuro-Mechanical Model for Interpersonal Coordination

Abstract

The present study investigates the coordination between two people oscillating handheld pendulums, with a special emphasis on the influence of the mechanical properties of the effector systems involved. The first part of the study is an experiment in which eight pairs of participants are asked to coordinate the oscillation of their pendulum with the other participant's in an in-phase or antiphase fashion. Two types of pendulums, A and B, having different resonance frequencies (Freq A=0.98 Hz and Freq B=0.64 Hz), were used in different experimental combinations. Results confirm that the preferred frequencies produced by participants while manipulating each pendulum individually were close to the resonance frequencies of the pendulums. In their attempt to synchronize with one another, participants met at common frequencies that were influenced by the mechanical properties of the two pendulums involved. In agreement with previous studies, both the variability of the behavior and the shift in the intended relative phase were found to depend on the task-effector asymmetry, i.e., the difference between the mechanical properties of the effector systems involved. In the second part of the study, we propose a model to account for these results. The model consists of two cross-coupled neuro-mechanical units, each composed of a neural oscillator driving a wrist-pendulum system. Taken individually, each unit reproduced the natural tendency of the participants to freely oscillate a pendulum close to its resonance frequency. When cross-coupled through the vision of the pendulum of the other unit, the two units entrain each other and meet at a common frequency influenced by the mechanical properties of the two pendulums involved. The ability of the proposed model to address the other effects observed as a function of the different conditions of the pendulum and intended mode of coordination is discussed.

Social coordination dynamics: Measuring human bonding

“…We note again that our results may be distinguished from previous dyadic studies in which one participant was explicitly instructed to track (or drive) the other (e.g. de Rugy et al, 2006;Oullier et al, 2003;Schmidt et al, 1990;Temprado et al, 2003) or to resist the mutual influence each member of the dyad exerted on the other (Schmidt & O'Brien, 1997).…”

“…Several studies have employed the sensorimotor coordination paradigm to investigate interpersonal coordination dynamics for the case when an individual intentionally synchronizes his/her movements with another by means of visual information exchange (e.g. de Rugy, Salesse, Oullier, & Temprado, 2006;Oullier, de Guzman, Jantzen, & Kelso, 2003;Schmidt, Carello, & Turvey, 1990;Temprado, Swinnen, Carson, Tourment, & Laurent, 2003). In such studies however, it is not yet clear whether spontaneous social entrainment actually occurs, i.e., as a two-way interaction where people mutually influence each other, or whether one individual simply acts as a pacing stimulus or "driver" for the other (Kelso, DelColle, & Schöner, 1990).…”

Modeling inter-human movement coordination: synchronization governs joint task dynamics

“…Similar to Beek et al [2002], de Rugy et al [2006 propose a neuro-mechanical unit per agent which employs a cross-coupled pair of self-sustained oscillators. The intended modes of coordination while swinging pendulums are replicated as well as the effect of resonance tuning when the pendulums were manipulated individually.…”

Transfer of learning between unimanual and bimanual rhythmic movement coordination: transfer is a function of the task dynamic

“…Many studies have investigated bimanual coordinated rhythmic movements (a single person moving and coordinating two limbs), but it is well known that the pattern of key stability characteristics are preserved when the coordination is between two people (e.g. de Rugy et al 2006;Schmidt et al 1990;Temprado et al 2003;Temprado and Laurent, 2004), or between a person and a computer display (e.g. Wimmers et al 1992;Buekers et al 2000;Wilson et al 2005aWilson et al , b, 2010a.…”