The Detection of Contingency and Animacy from Simple Animations in the Human Brain

Blakemore, Sarah‐Jayne; Boyer, Pascal; Pachot‐Clouard, Mathilde; Meltzoff, Andrew N.; Segebarth, Christoph; Decety, Jean

doi:10.1093/cercor/13.8.837

Cited by 237 publications

(149 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

132

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In animacy research, a few studies have made use of displays from a side view (Csibra, Gergely, Bíró, Koós, & Brockbank, 1999;Gergely, Nádasdy, Csibra, & Bíró, 1995;Kuhlmeier, Wynn, & Bloom, 2003); however, the majority of studies have incorporated animacy displays viewed from overhead (Bassili, 1976;Blakemore et al, 2003;Bloom & Veres, 1999;Blythe et al, 1999;Castelli, Frith, Happé, & Frith, 2002;Gelman, Durgin, & Kaufman, 1995;Heider & Simmel, 1944;Tremoulet & Feldman, 2000), with other studies leaving the viewpoint ambiguous (Szego & Rutherford, 2007). It would appear that no previous research has made a direct comparison of ability to judge and perceive intentions across these two viewpoints.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding intention from minimal displays of human activity

McAleer

Pollick

2008

Behavior Research Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

830If we were to open our eyes to any crowded scene, it would be possible to understand the actions and intentions of those around us. However, the effortless nature with which we reach this understanding belies the complex processing of visual information that appears necessary to perform this task. In order to begin the study of the underlying mechanisms of action understanding, it is useful to have simplified scenarios that provide a tractable amount of information. One source of these scenarios has been provided by what are known as animacy displays. Animacy displays involve the motion of simple geometric shapes that evoke spontaneous attributions of life and social intent. In their classic work, Heider and Simmel (1944) investigated how observers would describe the movement of such shapes (i.e., a large triangle, a small triangle, and a small circle) as they navigated around a large open square. Their findings showed that people ascribe meaning to the movements, personifying the shapes and attributing emotions and goals. Further work focused on the temporal and spatial dynamics of these displays (Bassili, 1976), with various authors proposing that these properties, rather than other physical qualities of the displays, are key to the attribution of intention (Bloom & Veres, 1999;Scholl & Tremoulet, 2000;Tremoulet & Feldman, 2000;Zacks, 2004).Despite research investigating the attribution of intention in animacy displays via spatial and temporal dynamics, there have been few studies that point to specific categories of actions that facilitate the ascription of intention. Research that has focused on this aspect is that of Blythe, Todd, and Miller (1999) and Barrett, Todd, Miller, and Blythe (2005). Blythe et al. established six categories of intentional motion that they claimed were basic to all animacy displays: chasing, evading, courting, being courted, fighting, and playing. The authors argued that these basic categories make up a large proportion of human motion and are fundamental to the development and survival of people. Blythe et al. created representations of these intentions by instructing participants to control animated ants on a computer screen and to move them as though the ants were performing the intentions. On showing these displays to a second population of participants, the authors found that the observers were able to distinguish one intention from another at levels above chance. Blythe et al. found only minimal confusion between displays, with a small bias toward calling displays play. The authors claimed that this bias was due to an underlying belief that play is the more common intention and that we learn other intentions via play. Barrett et al. (2005), using a modified set of intentions-chasing, courting, fighting, following, guarding, and playing-showed results similar to those in Blythe et al., obtaining high accuracy in judgments of intention. The authors also showed a response bias for play and again showed slight confusions-for example, between following and chasing.In the presen...

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding intention from minimal displays of human activity

McAleer

Pollick

2008

Behavior Research Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The first reported that DNA methylation at the OXTR was predictive of an individual's neural response to biological motion (Jack et al, 2012). Specifically, higher levels of OXTR methylation were associated with significantly higher activation of temporal parietal junction and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex -regions previously reported to support social perceptual functions (Blakemore et al, 2003;Dichter et al, 2009). Puglia et al (2015) reported that high levels of OXTR methylation were associated with increased neural activity in limbic and face processing regions when viewing angry and fearful faces.…”

Section: Oxytocin Enhances the Salience Of Socially Relevant Sensory mentioning

confidence: 99%

C-tactile afferents: Cutaneous mediators of oxytocin release during affiliative tactile interactions?

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low intensity, non-noxious, stimulation of cutaneous somatosensory nerves has been shown to trigger oxytocin release and is associated with increased social motivation, plus reduced physiological and behavioural reactivity to stressors. However, to date, little attention has been paid to the specific nature of the mechanosensory nerves which mediate these effects. In recent years, the neuroscientific study of human skin nerves (microneurography studies on single peripheral nerve fibres) has led to the identification and characterisation of a class of touch sensitive nerve fibres named C-Tactile afferents. Neither itch nor pain receptive, these unmyelinated, low threshold mechanoreceptors, found only in hairy skin, respond optimally to low force/velocity stroking touch. Notably, the speed of stroking which c-tactile afferents fire most strongly to is also that which people perceive to be most pleasant. The social touch hypothesis posits that this system of nerves has evolved in mammals to signal the rewarding value of physical contact in nurturing and social interactions. In support of this hypothesis, in this paper we review the evidence that cutaneous stimulation directly targeted to optimally activate c-tactile afferents reduces physiological arousal, carries a positive affective value and, under healthy conditions, inhibits responses to painful stimuli. These effects mirror those, we also review, which have been reported following endogenous release and exogenous administration of oxytocin. Taken together this evidence suggests c-tactile afferent stimulation may mediate oxytocin release during affiliative tactile interactions.

show abstract

“…Corroborating this supposition, the TPJ and STS, temporal poles and MPFC have all been implicated in mentalising processes in numerous studies, using a variety of methods and tasks (Gallagher & Frith 2003). Blakemore et al (2003) performed an infl uential fMRI study that employed simple shape animations to parse perceptions of animacy and contingency, as well as examine the effect of drawing attention to the contingency relations (via an explicit probe). Different parts of the brain were associated with viewing animate compared to contingent stimuli, and when both qualities were present activation was observed in superior parietal areas.…”

Section: Neuroimaging and The Intentional Stancementioning

confidence: 99%

Triggering the Intentional Stance

Mar

Macrae

2006

Novartis Foundation Symposia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. While humans possess a ready capacity to view a target (biological or otherwise) as an intentional agent (i.e. the 'intentional stance'), the conditions necessary for spontaneously eliciting these mentalizing processes are less well understood. Although research examining people's tendency to construe the motion of geometric shapes as intentional has done much to illuminate this issue, due to methodological limitations (a reliance on subjective self-report) this work has not fully addressed the potentially automatic and obligatory nature of mentalizing. Acknowledging this problem, recent research using prelinguistic infants, neuroimaging technology and methods that avoid explicit self-report all provide unique paths to circumvent this shortcoming. While work of this kind has generally corroborated the results of previous investigations, it has also raised a number of new issues. One such issue is whether spontaneous mentalizing processes for abstract non-biological stimuli are instantiated in the same neural architecture as those for realistic representations of intentional biological agents. This question is considered in the current chapter. Empathy and Fairness. Wiley, Chichester (Novartis Foundation Symposium 278) p 110-132 Spontaneous social perception versus controlled social judgementsThe ability to comprehend the beliefs, emotions and intentions of others is both characteristic of, and necessary for, successful human interaction. Our richly social nature and complex societal hierarchies demand these skills, such that those who exhibit defi cits in this domain experience considerable diffi culty interacting with others (e.g., individuals with autism; Tager-Flusberg 2001). Known as possessing a theory-of-mind (ToM), mentalizing, or adopting the intentional stance, this capacity to view others as possessing mental states can be directed to targets other than conspecifi cs. Not only are we tempted to believe that a pet hamster is 'just like a little person,' we routinely view quite abstract nonliving representations as if they were intentional agents. Be it an animated movie populated by talking 110

show abstract

The Detection of Contingency and Animacy from Simple Animations in the Human Brain

Cited by 237 publications

References 33 publications

Understanding intention from minimal displays of human activity

Understanding intention from minimal displays of human activity

C-tactile afferents: Cutaneous mediators of oxytocin release during affiliative tactile interactions?

Triggering the Intentional Stance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About