Neural correlates of social and non-social personal space intrusions: Role of defensive and peripersonal space systems in interpersonal distance regulation

Vieira, Joana B.; Pierzchajlo, Stephen; Mitchell, Derek

doi:10.1080/17470919.2019.1626763

Cited by 33 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As evidence, Quesque and collaborators revealed that using a tool, which is known to modify arm's length in the body schema, resulting in an increase in the peripersonal space, also alters preferred interpersonal distances (Quesque et al., 2017). Moreover, the fronto‐parietal structures supporting peripersonal space representation were found to contribute also to interpersonal distance adjustments (Vieira, Pierzchajlo, & Mitchell, 2019). Interpersonal comfort distance is also modulated by a number of variables, including cultural habits (Hall, 1966), ethnicity (Leibman, 1970), gender and age (Iachini et al., 2016), prior information about people’s morals (Iachini, Pagliaro, & Ruggiero, 2015) and psychopathological characteristics (Nandrino, Ducro, Iachini, & Coello, 2017).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of facial expression at perceptual threshold on electrodermal activity and social comfort distance

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Among the numerous non-verbal signals in a social situation, facial expressions are considered as crucial indications for interpreting the current social context and identifying potential sources of hazards and threats. However, in our modern societies characterized by overcrowded and hyperstimulating environments, we can only surreptitiously glimpse the faces of others and quickly make behavioral adjustments almost without realizing it. How the emotional signals carried by others' faces, which can be difficult to identify because of their poor visibility (e.g., quickly glimpse, poor lightening, overcrowding…), transience and diversity, influence our social behavior remains an open issue. A key component of social interactions is the adjustment of interpersonal distance both in animals (Hediger, 1968) and in humans (

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of facial expression at perceptual threshold on electrodermal activity and social comfort distance

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…At the neural level, the altered permeability of interpersonal space processing in ASDs was accompanied by reduced activity in the bilateral dIPS, right hMT+/V5 and left FFA. Previous studies showed that dIPS is preferentially activated by approaching social stimuli, as compared to non-social objects, forming, together with PMv and other parietal regions, a fronto-parietal network crucially involved in interpersonal space regulation (Holt et al 2014;Vieira et al 2017Vieira et al , 2020. Moreover, an approach-bias for social stimuli in dIPS (i.e., stronger activation for social vs. non-social stimuli) has been found to be positively correlated to individuals' personal space size and to the amount of time the participants spent, and preferred to spend, with others (Holt et al 2014).…”

Section: Altered Permeability Of Interpersonal Space In Asdmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…At the neural level, our understanding of interpersonal space processing relies on neuroimaging studies that have used images of virtual human faces or objects presented in different sizes to recreate the effect of individuals approaching towards (or withdrawing from) the participants (Holt et al 2014;Vieira et al 2017Vieira et al , 2020. These studies have identified a network of parietal and frontal regions involved in permeability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These studies have identified a network of parietal and frontal regions involved in permeability. In particular, two key brain areas seem to preferentially respond to social (compared to non-social) stimuli intruding the interpersonal space: the dorsal intraparietal sulcus (dIPS) and the ventral premotor cortex (PMv) (Holt et al 2014;Vieira et al 2017Vieira et al , 2020. Notably, activity in these regions has been linked to individuals' self-reported social activity, such as the amount of time spent, and preferred to spend, with others (Holt et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Neural correlates of interpersonal space permeability and flexibility in autism spectrum disorder

Massaccesi

Groessing

Rosenberger

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpersonal space can be defined as a safety zone immediately surrounding our body, which allows us to feel comfortable during social interactions. Previous studies indicate that the size of interpersonal space at which the other is perceived as intrusive (permeability) and the ability to adapt interpersonal distance based on contextual factors (flexibility) are altered in children and adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD). The present fMRI study aimed at extending the previous findings by investigating the behavioral and neurophysiological underpinnings of interpersonal space permeability and flexibility in adults with ASD. Individuals with ASD and matched controls (CTR) performed a modified version of the stop-distance paradigm for measuring interpersonal space preferences. Participants observed prerecorded videos of two confederates moving towards them and rated their comfort to the observed distance. The assessment of interpersonal space preferences was performed before and after engaging in cooperative and non-cooperative social interactions with the confederates, experimentally induced by means of a repeated trust game. We observed general lower comfort in response to an approaching confederate in the ASD group compared to the CTR group, indicating preference for larger interpersonal space in autism (altered permeability). This preference was accompanied by reduced activity in bilateral dorsal intraparietal sulcus (dIPS) and left fusiform face area (FFA), regions previously shown to be involved in interpersonal space regulation. Furthermore, we observed differences in effective connectivity among dIPS, FFA, and amygdala in ASDs compared to CTRs, depending on the level of experienced comfort. No differences between ASDs and CTRs were observed in the adaptation of interpersonal space following a cooperative and non-cooperative social interaction, suggesting preserved interpersonal space flexibility in the ASD adult population. The present study provides evidence for impaired permeability of interpersonal space in adults with ASD. The findings suggest that a dysregulation of the activity and connectivity of brain areas involved in the processing of interpersonal space may contribute to preference for larger distance and avoidance of physical proximity in ASDs. Future research is needed to examine whether the observed alteration of interpersonal space processing is an effect of or a contributing factor to the social disabilities characterizing autism.

show abstract

“…In humans, tasks usually adopted to study ARS require judging the reachability of a target stimulus or performing reachability movements, revealing a constant overestimation of this portion of space (Carello et al, 1989;Coello et al, 2008;Coello & Iwanow, 2006). Despite their anatomo-functional differences (Desmurget et al, 1999;Filimon, 2010;Lara et al, 2018;Pitzalis et al, 2013), some research on PPS in humans grew apart from the original electrophysiological findings and conflated ARS and PPS, defining PPS as ARS, or testing PPS using reachability tasks (Coello et al, 2008;Iachini et al, 2014;Vieira et al, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Peripersonal and reaching space differ: evidence from their spatial extent and multisensory facilitation pattern

Zanini

Patané

Blini

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peripersonal space is a multisensory representation of the space near body parts facilitating interactions with the close environment. Studies on non-human and human primates converge in showing that peripersonal space (PPS) is a body-part-centred representation that guides actions.Because of these characteristics, growing confusion conflates peripersonal and arm-reaching space (ARS) that is the space one's arm can reach. Despite neuroanatomical evidence favors their distinction, whether PPS and ARS tap into different spatial representations remains poorly understood. Here, in five experiments we found that PPS differs from ARS in male and female human participants (N = 120), as evidenced both by their performance and the modeling of their multisensory facilitation. We mapped multisensory facilitation in detecting touches at the hand, placed in different locations radially within ARS. Results showed that 1) PPS is smaller than ARS;2) multivariate modeling of spatial patterns of multisensory facilitation predicts well the position of the participants' hand within ARS; 3) multisensory facilitation maps shift according to changes of hand position, revealing hand-centred coding of PPS, but not ARS; and 4) cross-correlation analyses highlight isomorphic multisensory facilitation maps across hand positions, suggesting their functional similarity to the receptive fields of monkeys' multisensory neurons. In sharp contrast, ARS mapping produced undistinguishable patterns across hand positions, crossvalidating the conclusion that PPS and ARS are distinct. These findings call for a refinement of theoretical models of PPS and ARS, which are relevant in constructs as diverse as action and self representation, (social) interpersonal distance, brain-machine interfaces and neuroprosthetics. Significance Statement:The peripersonal space (PPS) is a multisensory interface allowing us to interact with objects in the space close to our body-parts, playing a fundamental role for the defense of the body and for the motor control of actions. Recent research has conflated PPS with the arm-reaching space (ARS), that is whole space reachable by the arm. However, there is actually no evidence supporting this equivalence and the anatomical and functional differences between PPS and ARS have been largely overlooked. In this paper, we frame the theoretical issue in depth, validate a novel methodological paradigm across five experiments, and eventually report robust and crossvalidated evidence for the distinction between PPS and ARS, supported by both multivariate and univariate analyses.

show abstract

Neural correlates of social and non-social personal space intrusions: Role of defensive and peripersonal space systems in interpersonal distance regulation

Cited by 33 publications

References 56 publications

The influence of facial expression at perceptual threshold on electrodermal activity and social comfort distance

The influence of facial expression at perceptual threshold on electrodermal activity and social comfort distance

Neural correlates of interpersonal space permeability and flexibility in autism spectrum disorder

Peripersonal and reaching space differ: evidence from their spatial extent and multisensory facilitation pattern

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About