2022
DOI: 10.3758/s13423-022-02103-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Social signalling as a framework for second-person neuroscience

Abstract: Despite the recent increase in second-person neuroscience research, it is still hard to understand which neurocognitive mechanisms underlie real-time social behaviours. Here, we propose that social signalling can help us understand social interactions both at the single- and two-brain level in terms of social signal exchanges between senders and receivers. First, we show how subtle manipulations of being watched provide an important tool to dissect meaningful social signals. We then focus on how social signall… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

3
13
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 133 publications
3
13
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In particular, while we are developing a clearer understanding of how social presence influences participants' behaviour, there is still much future research necessary in order to understand why it influences participants’ behaviour. That is, there is still much debate surrounding the exact underlying mechanisms that produce the behavioural differences observed between socially isolated paradigms, and those conducted with at least the perception of the presence of another person [ 79 ]. Previous attempts have alluded to the importance of social norms in influencing real world behaviour [ 58 ], the engagement of additional mentalizing processes in the presence of real people [ 24 , 34 ], the potential for social interaction [ 12 ] or the engagement of reputation management processes [ 80 ] as critical underlying factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, while we are developing a clearer understanding of how social presence influences participants' behaviour, there is still much future research necessary in order to understand why it influences participants’ behaviour. That is, there is still much debate surrounding the exact underlying mechanisms that produce the behavioural differences observed between socially isolated paradigms, and those conducted with at least the perception of the presence of another person [ 79 ]. Previous attempts have alluded to the importance of social norms in influencing real world behaviour [ 58 ], the engagement of additional mentalizing processes in the presence of real people [ 24 , 34 ], the potential for social interaction [ 12 ] or the engagement of reputation management processes [ 80 ] as critical underlying factors.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It has long been recognized that live dyadic interactions frequently include unconscious imitation (mimicry) during reciprocal interactions [1][2][3]. For example, it is also commonly observed in conversations between dyads, where copying nonverbal and verbal features is observed in addition to the explicit content of the speech [4][5][6].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As both observer and target were able to see each other in both conditions, their behaviours could subtly influence each other. Therefore, the task can be considered an interactive empathy task (Cañigueral et al, 2022; Cui et al, 2013). The task of the observer was to judge the pain intensity experienced by the target and her/his own feelings of unpleasantness while watching the others’ pain.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, the task can be considered an interactive empathy task (Cañigueral et al, 2022;Cui et al, 2013).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%