Is there collaboration specific neurophysiological activation during collaborative task activity? An analysis of brain responses using electroencephalography and hyperscanning

Abstract

Collaboration between two individuals is thought to be associated with the synchrony of two different brain activities. Indeed, prefrontal cortical activation and alpha frequency band modulation has been widely reported, but little is known about interbrain synchrony (IBS) changes occurring during social interaction such as collaboration or competition. In this study, we assess the dynamic of IBS variation in order to provide novel insights into the frequency band modulation underlying collaboration. To address this question, we used electroencephalography (EEG) to simultaneously record the brain activity of two individuals playing a computer-based game facing four different conditions: collaboration, competition, single participation, and passive observation. The computer-based game consisted of a fast button response task. Using data recorded in sensor space, we calculated an IBS value for each frequency band using both wavelet coherence transform and phase-locking value and performed single-subject analysis to compare each condition. We found significant IBS in frontal electrodes only present during collaboration associated with alpha frequency band modulation. In addition, we observed significant IBS in the theta frequency band for both collaboration and competition conditions, along with a significant singlesubject cortical activity. Competition is distinguishable through single-subject activity in several regions and frequency bands of the brain. Performance is correlated with single-subject frontal activation during collaboration in the alpha and beta frequency band.

An Analytical Approach for Naturalistic Cooperative and Competitive EEG-Hyperscanning Data: A Proof-of-Concept Study

“…In line with the EEG-hyperscanning literature on cooperative vs. competitive joint actions, we employed a zero-lag-insensitive, phase synchrony-based approach. Previous studies have usually employed the phase locking value (PLV) to estimate the phase synchronization between two EEG signals in the comparison between cooperation and competition [34][35][36]. Liu and colleagues (2021) [34] and Sinha and colleagues (2016) [35] did not obtain significant results, whereas Léné and colleagues (2021) [36] succeeded in differentiating cooperation from competition.…”

“…Previous studies have usually employed the phase locking value (PLV) to estimate the phase synchronization between two EEG signals in the comparison between cooperation and competition [34][35][36]. Liu and colleagues (2021) [34] and Sinha and colleagues (2016) [35] did not obtain significant results, whereas Léné and colleagues (2021) [36] succeeded in differentiating cooperation from competition. However, it must be noted that Léné and colleagues did not use an ecological study paradigm, but a computer-based fast button-response task.…”

“…Also, given the difficulty in identifying tasks that can be both cooperative and competitive, the neural mechanisms sustaining these two types of joint action have mostly been investigated through comparing the results obtained using different joint tasks, introducing a methodological bias. Only a few studies have investigated the neural mechanisms underpinning both cooperation and competition by employing the same task, although not within an ecological study paradigm [34][35][36][37]. Liu and colleagues [34] tried to concurrently investigate the neural mechanisms of cooperation and competition by employing the same quasi-ecological task for both conditions, i.e., tennis played through a video game.…”

“…These approaches are appropriate to analyze the functional dynamics within one individual brain or between brains during the performance of cooperative, simultaneous, and continuous joint action tasks [24,31,42,43], but may be unsuitable to detect the functional dynamics between the brains of individuals involved in competitive and/or turn-based tasks. As elucidated in two recent studies [34,36], phase synchrony-based methods may face challenges in scenarios characterized by substantial variability in the frequency of the actions performed by the interacting individuals, as occurs in turn-based joint actions, especially when characterized by competitive elements.…”

Interpersonal brain synchronization during face-to-face economic exchange between acquainted dyads

“…In addition to the original study, we examined whether IBS was specific to the interacting pair. One of the pitfalls of hyperscanning is that an increased IBS might be observed when a different participant performs the same task independently, although there is no interaction between pairs [ 18 ]. Therefore, we confirmed that IBS would be higher in interacting pairs than in non-interacting pairs by performing random-pair analysis.…”