Task-dependent and distinct roles of the temporoparietal junction and inferior frontal cortex in the control of imitation

Jeremy Hogeveen, Sukhvinder S Obhi, Michael J Banissy, Idalmis Santiesteban, Clare Press, Caroline Catmur, Geoffrey Bird, Jeremy Hogeveen, Sukhvinder S Obhi, Michael J Banissy, Idalmis Santiesteban, Clare Press, Caroline Catmur, Geoffrey Bird

Abstract

The control of neurological networks supporting social cognition is crucially important for social interaction. In particular, the control of imitation is directly linked to interaction quality, with impairments associated with disorders characterized by social difficulties. Previous work suggests inferior frontal cortex (IFC) and the temporoparietal junction (TPJ) are involved in controlling imitation, but the functional roles of these areas remain unclear. Here, transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) was used to enhance cortical excitability at IFC and the TPJ prior to the completion of three tasks: (i) a naturalistic social interaction during which increased imitation is known to improve rapport, (ii) a choice reaction time task in which imitation needs to be inhibited for successful performance and (iii) a non-imitative control task. Relative to sham stimulation, stimulating IFC improved the context-dependent control of imitation-participants imitated more during the social interaction and less during the imitation inhibition task. In contrast, stimulating the TPJ reduced imitation in the inhibition task without affecting imitation during social interaction. Neither stimulation site affected the non-imitative control task. These data support a model in which IFC modulates imitation directly according to task demands, whereas TPJ controls task-appropriate shifts in attention toward representation of the self or the other, indirectly impacting upon imitation.

Keywords: imitation; inferior frontal cortex; mimicry; mirror system; temporoparietal junction; transcranial direct current stimulation.

© The Author (2014). Published by Oxford University Press.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
(A) Final frames of each trial in the imitation inhibition and inhibitory control tasks as well as the baseline condition. Note: Font size of the numerical cues is exaggerated for display purposes. Participants were instructed to respond with an index finger lift in response to the presentation of a 1 and a middle finger lift in response to presentation of a 2. (B) During the social interaction the confederate repeatedly touched her face. The degree of imitative behavior exhibited by the participant was analyzed as a function of brain stimulation.
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Imitation inhibition was reduced by anodal stimulation of TPJ and IFC relative to sham stimulation while a closely matched inhibitory control task was not. Figure depicts the raw IE effects (i.e. incongruent IE—congruent IE), but in the formal analyzes baseline task performance was also controlled for (*indicates significance at P < 0.05).
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Face touches were performed significantly more in the IFC condition than the Sham condition following observation of face touching. For ease of interpretation, the raw data are depicted, but in the formal analyzes baseline behavior was also controlled for (*represents significance at P < 0.05).

References

    1. Aron AR, Robbins TW, Poldrack RA. Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex. Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 2004;8(4):170–7.
    1. Bailenson JN, Beall AC, Loomis J, Blascovich J, Turk M. Transformed social interaction: decoupling representation from behavior and form in collaborative virtual environments. PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments. 2004;13(4):428–41.
    1. Bailenson JN, Yee N. Digital chameleons virtual environments. Psychological Science. 2005;16(10):814–19.
    1. Bird G, Catmur C, Silani G, Frith C, Frith U. Attention does not modulate neural responses to social stimuli in autism spectrum disorders. NeuroImage. 2006;31(4):1614–24.
    1. Brass M, Bekkering H, Wohlschläger A, Prinz W. Compatibility between observed and executed finger movements: comparing symbolic, spatial, and imitative cues. Brain and Cognition. 2000;44(2):124–43.
    1. Brass M, Derrfuss J, von Cramon DY. The inhibition of imitative and overlearned responses: a functional double dissociation. Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(1):89–98.
    1. Brass M, Ruby P, Spengler S. Inhibition of imitative behaviour and social cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 2009;364(1528):2359–67.
    1. Castelli F, Happé F, Frith U, Frith C. Movement and mind: a functional imaging study of perception and interpretation of complex intentional movement patterns. NeuroImage. 2000;12(3):314–25.
    1. Catmur C, Heyes C. Time course analyses confirm independence of imitative and spatial compatibility. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2011;37(2):409–21.
    1. Catmur C, Mars RB, Rushworth MF, Heyes C. Making mirrors: premotor cortex stimulation enhances mirror and counter-mirror motor facilitation. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2011;23(9):2352–62.
    1. Catmur C, Walsh V, Heyes C. Associative sequence learning: the role of experience in the development of imitation and the mirror system. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 2009;364(1528):2369–80.
    1. Chaminade T, Meltzoff AN, Decety J. An fMRI study of imitation: action representation and body schema. Neuropsychologia. 2005;43(1):115–27.
    1. Chartrand TL, Bargh JA. The chameleon effect: the perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1999;76(6):893–910.
    1. Chartrand TL, Lakin JL. The antecedents and consequences of human behavioral mimicry. Annual Peview of Psychology. 2013;64:285–308.
    1. Cho YS, Proctor RW. Influences of multiple spatial stimulus and response codes on orthogonal stimulus: response compatibility. Perception & Psychophysics. 2004;66(6):1003–17.
    1. Cohen S. Psychosocial models of the role of social support in the etiology of physical disease. Health Psychology. 1988;7(3):269–97.
    1. Cook JL, Barbalat G, Blakemore S-J. Top-down modulation of the perception of other people in schizophrenia and autism. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2012;6 (June), 175.
    1. Cook JL, Bird G. Social attitudes differentially modulate imitation in adolescents and adults. Experimental Brain Research. 2011 211(3–4), 601–12.
    1. Cook JL, Bird G. Atypical social modulation of imitation in autism spectrum conditions. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders. 2012;42(6):1045–51.
    1. Cross KA, Torrisi S, Losin EAR, Iacoboni M. Controlling automatic imitative tendencies: interactions between mirror neuron and cognitive control systems. NeuroImage. 2013;83:493–504.
    1. Damoiseaux JS, Rombouts SARB, Barkhof F, et al. Consistent resting-state networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2006;103(37):13848–53.
    1. De Coster L, Verschuere B, Goubert L, Tsakiris M, Brass M. I suffer more from your pain when you act like me: being imitated enhances affective responses to seeing someone else in pain. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience. 2013;13:519–32.
    1. Decety J, Chaminade T, Grèzes J, Meltzoff AN. A PET exploration of the neural mechanisms involved in reciprocal imitation. NeuroImage. 2002;15(1):265–72.
    1. Frith CD, Frith U. How we predict what other people are going to do. Brain Research. 2006;1079(1):36–46.
    1. Frith U, Frith CD. Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences. 2003;358(1431):459–73.
    1. Gandiga PC, Hummel FC, Cohen LG. Transcranial DC stimulation (tDCS): a tool for double-blind sham-controlled clinical studies in brain stimulation. Clinical Neurophysiology. 2006;117(4):845–50.
    1. George LK, Blazer DG, Hughes DC, Fowler N. Social support and the outcome of major depression. The British Journal of Psychiatry. 1989;154:478–85.
    1. Heiser M, Iacoboni M, Maeda F, Marcus J, Mazziotta JC. The essential role of broca’s area in imitation. European Journal of Neuroscience. 2003;17(5):1123–28.
    1. Heyes C. Automatic imitation. Psychological Bulletin. 2011;137(3):463–83.
    1. Hogeveen J, Obhi SS. Automatic imitation is automatic, but less so for narcissists. Experimental Brain Research. 2013;224(4):613–21.
    1. Holland R, Leff AP, Josephs O, et al. Speech facilitation by left inferior frontal cortex stimulation. Current Biology: CB. 2011;21(16):1403–7.
    1. Iacoboni M, Woods RP, Brass M, Bekkering H, Mazziota JC, Rizzolatti G. Cortical mechanisms of human imitation. Science. 1999;286(5449):2526–28.
    1. Kaufman J, Yang B-Z, Douglas-Palumberi H, et al. Social supports and serotonin transporter gene moderate depression in maltreated children. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 2004;101(49):17316–21.
    1. Kiecolt-Glaser JK, Ricker D, George J, et al. Urinary cortisol levels, cellular immunocompetency, and loneliness in psychiatric inpatients. Psychosomatic Medicine. 1984;46(1):15–23.
    1. Kilner JM, Neal A, Weiskopf N, Friston KJ, Frith CD. Evidence of mirror neurons in human inferior frontal gyrus. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2009;29(32):10153–59.
    1. Kraskov A, Dancause N, Quallo MM, Shepherd S, Lemon RN. Corticospinal neurons in macaque ventral premotor cortex with mirror properties: a potential mechanism for action suppression? Neuron. 2009;64(6):922–30.
    1. Lafrance M, Broadbent M. Group rapport: posture sharing as a nonverbal indicator. Group & Organization Management. 1976;1(3):328–33.
    1. Lakin JL, Chartrand TL. Using nonconscious behavioral mimicry to create affiliation and rapport. Psychological Science. 2003;14(4):334–39.
    1. Lopes PN, Grewal D, Kadis J, Gall M, Salovey P. Evidence that emotional intelligence is related to job performance and affect and attitudes at work. Psicothema. 2006;18:132–38.
    1. Mitchell JP. Contributions of functional neuroimaging to the study of social cognition. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2008;17(2):142–46.
    1. Mukamel R, Ekstrom AD, Kaplan J, Iacoboni M, Fried I. Single-neuron responses in humans during execution and observation of actions. Current Biology. 2010;20(8):750–56.
    1. Neal DT, Chartrand TL. Embodied emotion perception: amplifying and dampening facial feedback modulates emotion perception accuracy. Social Psychological and Personality Science. 2011;2(6):673–78.
    1. Nitsche MA, Cohen LG, Wassermann EM, et al. Transcranial direct current stimulation: state of the art 2008. Brain Stimulation. 2008;1(3):206–23.
    1. Nitsche MA, Nitsche MS, Klein CC, Tergau F, Rothwell JC, Paulus W. Level of action of cathodal DC polarisation induced inhibition of the human motor cortex. Clinical Neurophysiology’. 2003;114(4):600–4.
    1. Nitsche MA, Paulus W. Sustained excitability elevations induced by transcranial DC motor cortex stimulation in humans. Neurology. 2001;57(10):1899–901.
    1. Obhi SS, Hogeveen J, Giacomin M, Jordan CH. Automatic imitation is reduced in narcissists. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 2014;40(3):920–8.
    1. Press C, Bird G, Flach R, Heyes C. Robotic movement elicits automatic imitation. Cognitive Brain Research. 2005;25(3):632–40.
    1. Press C, Catmur C, Cook R, Widmann H, Heyes C, Bird G. FMRI evidence of “mirror” responses to geometric shapes. PloS One. 2012a;7(12):e51934.
    1. Press C, Weiskopf N, Kilner JM. Dissociable roles of human inferior frontal gyrus during action execution and observation. NeuroImage. 2012b;60(3):1671–77.
    1. Putzar L, Goerendt I, Lange K, Rösler F, Röder B. Early visual deprivation impairs multisensory interactions in humans. Nature Neuroscience. 2007;10(10):1243–45.
    1. Santiesteban I, Banissy MJ, Catmur C, Bird G. Enhancing social ability by stimulating right temporoparietal junction. Current Biology. 2012a;22(23):2274–77.
    1. Santiesteban I, White S, Cook J, Gilbert SJ, Heyes C, Bird G. Training social cognition: from imitation to theory of mind. Cognition. 2012b;122(2):228–35.
    1. Satpute AB, Lieberman MD. Integrating automatic and controlled processes into neurocognitive models of social cognition. Brain Research. 2006;1079(1):86–97.
    1. Shore DI, Barnes ME, Spence C. Temporal aspects of the visuotactile congruency effect. Neuroscience Letters. 2006 392(1–2), 96–100.
    1. Silk JB. Social components of fitness in primate groups. Science. 2007;317(5843):1347–51.
    1. Sowden S, Catmur C. The role of the right temporoparietal junction in the control of imitation. Cerebral Cortex. 2013;25(4):1107–13.
    1. Spengler S, Bird G, Brass M. Hyperimitation of actions is related to reduced understanding of others’ minds in autism spectrum conditions. Biological Psychiatry. 2010a;68(12):1148–55.
    1. Spengler S, von Cramon DY, Brass M. Resisting motor mimicry: control of imitation involves processes central to social cognition in patients with frontal and temporo-parietal lesions. Social Neuroscience. 2010b;5(4):401–16.
    1. Spengler S, von Cramon YD, Brass M. Control of shared representations relies on key processes involved in mental state attribution. Human Brain Mapping. 2009;30(11):3704–18.
    1. Tambini A, Ketz N, Davachi L. Enhanced brain correlations during rest are related to memory for recent experiences. Neuron. 2010;65(2):280–90.
    1. Teufel C, Alexis DM, Clayton NS, Davis G. Mental-state attribution drives rapid, reflexive gaze following. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics. 2010;72(3):695–705.
    1. Tkach D, Reimer J, Hatsopoulos NG. Congruent activity during action and action observation in motor cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2007;27(48):13241–50.
    1. Van Overwalle F. Social cognition and the brain: a meta-analysis. Human Brain Mapping. 2009;30(3):829–58.
    1. Wang Y, Hamilton AFdC. Anterior medial prefrontal cortex implements social priming of mimicry. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience. n.d. doi:10.1093/scan/nsu076.
    1. Wang Y, Hamilton AF, d. C. Social top-down response modulation (STORM): a model of the control of mimicry in social interaction. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience. 2012;6 (June), 153.
    1. Wang Y, Ramsey R, Hamilton AFdC. The control of mimicry by eye contact is mediated by medial prefrontal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2011;31(33):12001–10.
    1. Zaki J, Hennigan K, Weber J, Ochsner KN. Social cognitive conflict resolution: contributions of domain-general and domain-specific neural systems. The Journal of Neuroscience. 2010;30(25):8481–88.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer och medarbetare

Medicinska tillstånd

Läkemedelsinterventioner

3
Prenumerera