Interplay of self-other distinction and cognitive control mechanisms in a social automatic imitation task: An ERP study

Rauchbauer, Birgit; Lorenz, Corinna; Lamm, Claus; Pfabigan, Daniela M.

doi:10.3758/s13415-021-00878-w

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, our results indicated that the ASD individuals continued to recognize themselves later in the self-to-other direction and begin to see themselves earlier in the other-to-self direction than the TDCs. These results are consistent with the fact that the default state of the self/other switching process is self and that moving from self to other is an active process that requires some effort [21,78]. This ability to shift from self to other, also involved in directing attention to others, is thought to be significantly impaired in ASD, consistent with their lower social attention [79].…”

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 79%

Self/other distinction in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessed with a double mirror paradigm

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Self/other distinction (SOD), which refers to the ability to distinguish one’s own body, actions, and mental representations from those of others, is an essential skill for effective social interaction. A large body of clinical evidence suggests that disruptions in SOD may be key to social communication deficits in individuals with autism spectrum disorders (ASD). In particular, egocentric biases have been found in cognitive, affective, behavioural, and motor domains. However, research in this area is scarce and consists of recognition paradigms that have used only static images; these methods may be insufficient for assessing SOD, given the increasing role of embodiment in our understanding of the pathophysiology of ASD. Method A single-centre, prospective pilot study was carried out to investigate, for the first time, self-recognition and SOD in seven adolescents with ASD compared with matched, typically developing controls (TDCs) using the "Alter Ego"TM double mirror paradigm. The participants viewed a double mirror in which their own face was gradually morphed into the face of an unfamiliar other (self-to-other sequence) or vice versa (other-to-self sequence); participants were instructed to indicate at which point the morph looked more like their own face than the other’s face. Two judgement criteria were used: 1) M1: the threshold at which subjects started to recognize their own face during the other-to-self morphing sequence; 2) M2: the threshold at which subjects started to recognize the other’s face during the self-to-other morphing sequence. Results Consistent with the predictions, the results showed that the participants with ASD exhibited earlier self-recognition in the other-to-self sequence and delayed other-recognition in the self-to-other sequence, suggesting an egocentric bias. SOD impairments were also marginally correlated with ASD severity, indicating earlier face recognition in more severely affected individuals. Furthermore, in contrast with that of TDCs, the critical threshold for switching between self and other varied with the direction of morphing in ASD participants. Finally, these differences in face recognition and SOD using mirrors, unlike previous research using static images, support the central place of bodily self-consciousness in SOD impairments. Conclusions Although additional research is needed to replicate the results of this preliminary study, it revealed the first behavioural evidence of altered SOD in ASD individuals on an embodied, semiecological face-recognition paradigm. Implications for understanding ASD are discussed from a developmental perspective, and new research and therapeutic perspectives are presented.

show abstract

Section: Plos Onesupporting

confidence: 79%

Self/other distinction in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessed with a double mirror paradigm

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, the lack of relationships between the race-IAT and the measures of social cognition that we have employed may be explained by each of these constituent tasks relying on, to a greater or lesser extent, other (non-social) cognitive or attentional processes. Recently it has been shown that the Stimulus Response Compatibility task, which is used commonly to measure imitative tendencies ( Cracco et al, 2018 ), captures more general-purpose cognitive processes deployed in both social and non-social contexts, such as response inhibition and interference resolution ( Czekóová et al, 2021 ; Rauchbauer et al, 2021 ). Furthermore, Santiesteban et al (2012) provide evidence that the Dot Task relies on the directional rather than agentive features of the task avatar, suggesting that performance on this task may reflect automatic attentional orienting rather than perspective taking per se .…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationships between the race implicit association test and other measures of implicit and explicit social cognition

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe race-based Implicit Association Test (IAT) was proposed to measure individual differences in implicit racial bias subsumed within social cognition. In recent years, researchers have debated the theoretical tenets underpinning the IAT, questioning whether performance on this task: (1) measures implicit attitudes that operate automatically outside of conscious awareness; (2) reflects individual differences in social cognition; and (3) can predict social behavior. One way to better address these research questions is to assess whether the race-IAT correlates with other implicit processes that are subsumed within social cognition.AimsThe current study assessed whether the race-IAT was related to other commonly used individual difference measures of implicit (and explicit) social cognition. Experiment 1 assessed whether dissociable patterns of performance on the race-IAT were related to measures of implicit imitative tendencies, emotion recognition and perspective taking toward White task actors, as well as explicit measures of trait and state affective empathy and racial bias. Overcoming limitations of task conceptual correspondence, Experiment 2 assessed whether these latter tasks were sensitive in detecting racial biases by using both White and Black task actors and again examined their relationships with the race-IAT.MethodIn two lab-based experiments, 226 and 237 participants completed the race-IAT followed by an extensive battery of social cognition measures.ResultsAcross both experiments, pro-White/anti-Black bias on the race-IAT was positively related to a pro-White bias on explicit measures of positive affective empathy. However, relationships between the race-IAT and implicit imitative tendencies, perspective taking, emotion recognition, and explicit trait and negative state affective empathy were statistically equivalent.ConclusionThe race-IAT was consistently related to explicit measures of positive state affective empathy but not to other individual difference measures of implicit social cognition. These findings are discussed with regards to the theoretical underpinnings of the race-IAT as an individual difference measure of implicit social cognition, as well as alternative explanations relating to the reliability of social cognition measures and the various combinations of general-purpose (social and non-social) executive processes that underpin performance on these tasks.

show abstract

“…This has revealed several components of event‐related potentials (ERPs) associated with these discrete cognitive processes; both low‐level perceptual processes related to the early detection of body parts – the N170 and N190 components (Deschrijver, Wiersema & Brass, 2017b; Feuerriegel, Churches, Hofmann & Keage, 2015; Hinojosa, Mercado & Carretié, 2015; Rauchbauer et al ., 2018; Schindler & Bublatzky, 2020), and later N2 and P3 components implicated in higher‐level processes of conflict detection and resolution (Albert et al ., 2010; Albert, López‐Martín, Tapia, Montoya & Carretié, 2012). The N170 and N190 are measured, respectively, at 130–200 and 150–200 ms after stimulus onset at lateral parieto‐occipital (Feuerriegel et al ., 2015; Hinojosa et al ., 2015) and occipito‐temporal sites (Rauchbauer et al ., 2021; Thierry, Pegna, Dodds, Roberts, Basan & Downing, 2006). The N2 component is recorded at 200–400 ms post‐stimulus at fronto‐central electrodes (Albert et al ., 2010; Rauchbauer et al ., 2018), while the P3 component occurs 300–500 ms after stimulus onset at fronto‐central or parietal sites (dependent upon the paradigm employed; Polich, 2007), and has been associated specifically with action monitoring and response suppression (Enriquez‐Geppert, Konrad, Pantev & Huster, 2010; Rauchbauer et al ., 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Originally, we interpreted these opposing patterns of social information processing to reflect differences in self‐other distinction – a social‐specific cognitive process that affords the flexible prioritization of self‐ or other‐representations. More recently, however, scholars have begun to question whether such differences in social cognition reflect inter‐individual variability in more domain‐general mechanisms; namely, those involved in cognitive control (Binney & Ramsey, 2020; Darda, Butler & Ramsey, 2020; Rauchbauer, Lorenz, Lamm & Pfabigan, 2021) that together support the prioritization of relevant and suppression of irrelevant information, and the inhibition or cancellation of inappropriate actions. Cognitive control might allow us to switch flexibly between competing self‐ and other‐representations by preventing us from misattributing our egocentric perspective on the world onto others (Kuhl, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The N170 and N190 are measured, respectively, at 130–200 and 150–200 ms after stimulus onset at lateral parieto‐occipital (Feuerriegel et al ., 2015; Hinojosa et al ., 2015) and occipito‐temporal sites (Rauchbauer et al ., 2021; Thierry, Pegna, Dodds, Roberts, Basan & Downing, 2006). The N2 component is recorded at 200–400 ms post‐stimulus at fronto‐central electrodes (Albert et al ., 2010; Rauchbauer et al ., 2018), while the P3 component occurs 300–500 ms after stimulus onset at fronto‐central or parietal sites (dependent upon the paradigm employed; Polich, 2007), and has been associated specifically with action monitoring and response suppression (Enriquez‐Geppert, Konrad, Pantev & Huster, 2010; Rauchbauer et al ., 2021). Importantly, both the N2 and P3 appear to be more responsive to social aspects of stimuli, such as in‐ relative to out‐group effects (Rauchbauer et al ., 2018), and emotional compared with non‐emotional facial expressions (Albert et al ., 2010; Zhang & Lu, 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A high‐density EEG investigation into the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying differences between personality profiles in social information processing

Czekóová

Shaw

Lamoš

et al. 2022

Scandinavian J Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether differences between personality styles in the processing of social stimuli reflect variability in underlying general-purpose or social-specific neurocognitive mechanisms. Sixty-five individuals classified previously into two distinct personality profiles underwent high-density electroencephalography whilst performing tasks that tap into both aspects of cognitive processingnamely, two distinct facets of general-purpose response inhibition (interference resolution and action withholding) during social information processing. To determine the stage of processing at which personality differences manifest, we assessed event-related components associated with the early visual discrimination of social stimuli (N170, N190) and later more general conflict-related processes (N2, P3). Although a performance index of interference resolution was comparable between the personality profiles, differences were detected in action withholding. Specifically, individuals expressing a wider repertoire of personality styles and more adaptive emotion regulation performed significantly better at withholding inappropriate actions to neutral faces presented in emotional contexts compared with those exhibiting stronger preferences for fewer and less adaptive personality styles and more ruminative affective tendencies. At the neurophysiological level, however, difference between the profiles was observed in brain responses elicited to the same stimuli within the N170. These results indicate that neural processes related to early visual discrimination might contribute to differences in the suppression of inappropriate responses towards social stimuli in populations with different personality dispositions.

show abstract

Interplay of self-other distinction and cognitive control mechanisms in a social automatic imitation task: An ERP study

Cited by 4 publications

References 89 publications

Self/other distinction in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessed with a double mirror paradigm

Self/other distinction in adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) assessed with a double mirror paradigm

Relationships between the race implicit association test and other measures of implicit and explicit social cognition

A high‐density EEG investigation into the neurocognitive mechanisms underlying differences between personality profiles in social information processing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About