Brain Synchrony in Competition and Collaboration During Multiuser Neurofeedback-Based Gaming

Abstract

EEG hyperscanning during multiuser gaming offers opportunities to study brain characteristics of social interaction under various paradigms. In this study, we aimed to characterize neural signatures and phase-based functional connectivity patterns of gaming strategies during collaborative and competitive alpha neurofeedback games. Twenty pairs of participants with no close relationship took part in three sessions of collaborative or competitive multiuser neurofeedback (NF), with identical graphical user interface, using Relative Alpha (RA) power as a control signal. Collaborating dyads had to keep their RA within 5% of each other for the team to be awarded a point, while members of competitive dyads scored points if their RA was 10% above their opponent's. Interbrain synchrony existed only during gaming but not during baseline in either collaborative or competitive gaming. Spectral analysis and interbrain connectivity showed that in collaborative gaming, players with higher resting state alpha content were more active in regulating their RA to match those of their partner. Moreover, interconnectivity was the strongest between homologous brain structures of the dyad in theta and alpha bands, indicating a similar degree of planning and social exchange. Competitive gaming emphasized the difference between participants who were able to relax and, in this way, maintain RA, and those who had an unsuccessful approach. Analysis of interbrain connections shows engagement of frontal areas in losers, but not in winners, indicating the formers' attempt to mentalise and apply strategies that might be suitable for conventional gaming, but inappropriate for the alpha neurofeedback-based game. We show that in gaming based on multiplayer non-verbalized NF, the winning strategy is dependent on the rules of the game and on the behavior of the opponent. Mental strategies that characterize successful gaming in the physical world might not be adequate for NF-based gaming.

Winners and losers in brain computer interface competitive gaming: directional connectivity analysis

“…Our final research question concerns the existence of interbrain connectivity. In our previous study, we showed that during competitive gaming, the PLV was asymmetricalalmost all cortical areas in W players were in synchrony with the parietal area of L players in the alpha band (Susnoschi Luca et al, 2021). Because PLV is non-directional, the method could not reveal the direction of information flow.…”

“…Interaction between BCI players includes working towards a common goal (collaboration) or working individually to assert dominance (competition). Collaborative gaming has been based on different BCI modalities, such as steady-state visual evoked potential (Li and Nam, 2016), event-related potential (Poli et al, 2014), P300 (Korczowski et al, 2015), motor imagery (MI) (Bonnet et al, 2013), and operant conditioning (Hjelm & Browall, 2000;Susnoschi Luca et al, 2021). Collaboratively performing a task has the potential to improve players' performance (Y.…”

“…Competitive gaming has been mostly based on MI or operant conditioning (Daeglau et al, 2020;J. Li et al, 2013;Novak et al, 2017) and some studies have used these two paradigms for both collaborative and competitive tasks (Bonnet et al, 2013;Cho et al, 2020;Hjelm & Browall, 2000;Susnoschi Luca et al, 2021). Bonnet et al (2013) found that competitive and collaborative conditions may lead to similar levels of performance and motivation.…”

“…In our previous study, we investigated the differences in intra-and interbrain synchrony between competitive and collaborative dyads in a BCI game based on relative alpha (RA) operant conditioning (Susnoschi Luca et al, 2021). As PLV has to be calculated over short time periods, we compared only 0.5 s epochs during scoring.…”

Inter-brain plasticity as a biological mechanism of change in psychotherapy: A review and integrative model

“…Recent studies have examined these questions using dyadic neurofeedback paradigms, in which participants' brain activity is visualized (e.g., by displaying coherence metrics between two people's EEG readings; Chen et al, 2021), allowing them to see whether it is synchronized or not. Participants who are instructed to use this feedback to increase their inter-brain synchrony over time are able to do so (e.g., Susnoschi Luca et al, 2021). Dyadic neurofeedback studies in humans (Müller et al, 2021) and in pigeons (Yang et al, 2020) have demonstrated causal links between inter-brain synchrony and prosociality; the researchers increased inter-brain synchrony using dyadic neurofeedback and demonstrated that this increased synchrony was associated with more pro-social experiences (Müller et al, 2021) and behavior (Yang et al, 2020).…”