Cargando…
Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony
Temporal coordination during infant-caregiver social interaction is thought to be crucial for supporting early language acquisition and cognitive development. Despite a growing prevalence of theories suggesting that increased inter-brain synchrony associates with many key aspects of social interacti...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9981599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36864074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28988-0 |
_version_ | 1784900140333531136 |
---|---|
author | Marriott Haresign, I. Phillips, E. A. M. Whitehorn, M. Lamagna, F. Eliano, M. Goupil, L. Jones, E. J. H. Wass, S. V. |
author_facet | Marriott Haresign, I. Phillips, E. A. M. Whitehorn, M. Lamagna, F. Eliano, M. Goupil, L. Jones, E. J. H. Wass, S. V. |
author_sort | Marriott Haresign, I. |
collection | PubMed |
description | Temporal coordination during infant-caregiver social interaction is thought to be crucial for supporting early language acquisition and cognitive development. Despite a growing prevalence of theories suggesting that increased inter-brain synchrony associates with many key aspects of social interactions such as mutual gaze, little is known about how this arises during development. Here, we investigated the role of mutual gaze onsets as a potential driver of inter-brain synchrony. We extracted dual EEG activity around naturally occurring gaze onsets during infant-caregiver social interactions in N = 55 dyads (mean age 12 months). We differentiated between two types of gaze onset, depending on each partners’ role. ‘Sender’ gaze onsets were defined at a time when either the adult or the infant made a gaze shift towards their partner at a time when their partner was either already looking at them (mutual) or not looking at them (non-mutual). ‘Receiver’ gaze onsets were defined at a time when their partner made a gaze shift towards them at a time when either the adult or the infant was already looking at their partner (mutual) or not (non-mutual). Contrary to our hypothesis we found that, during a naturalistic interaction, both mutual and non-mutual gaze onsets were associated with changes in the sender, but not the receiver’s brain activity and were not associated with increases in inter-brain synchrony above baseline. Further, we found that mutual, compared to non-mutual gaze onsets were not associated with increased inter brain synchrony. Overall, our results suggest that the effects of mutual gaze are strongest at the intra-brain level, in the ‘sender’ but not the ‘receiver’ of the mutual gaze. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9981599 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99815992023-03-04 Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony Marriott Haresign, I. Phillips, E. A. M. Whitehorn, M. Lamagna, F. Eliano, M. Goupil, L. Jones, E. J. H. Wass, S. V. Sci Rep Article Temporal coordination during infant-caregiver social interaction is thought to be crucial for supporting early language acquisition and cognitive development. Despite a growing prevalence of theories suggesting that increased inter-brain synchrony associates with many key aspects of social interactions such as mutual gaze, little is known about how this arises during development. Here, we investigated the role of mutual gaze onsets as a potential driver of inter-brain synchrony. We extracted dual EEG activity around naturally occurring gaze onsets during infant-caregiver social interactions in N = 55 dyads (mean age 12 months). We differentiated between two types of gaze onset, depending on each partners’ role. ‘Sender’ gaze onsets were defined at a time when either the adult or the infant made a gaze shift towards their partner at a time when their partner was either already looking at them (mutual) or not looking at them (non-mutual). ‘Receiver’ gaze onsets were defined at a time when their partner made a gaze shift towards them at a time when either the adult or the infant was already looking at their partner (mutual) or not (non-mutual). Contrary to our hypothesis we found that, during a naturalistic interaction, both mutual and non-mutual gaze onsets were associated with changes in the sender, but not the receiver’s brain activity and were not associated with increases in inter-brain synchrony above baseline. Further, we found that mutual, compared to non-mutual gaze onsets were not associated with increased inter brain synchrony. Overall, our results suggest that the effects of mutual gaze are strongest at the intra-brain level, in the ‘sender’ but not the ‘receiver’ of the mutual gaze. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC9981599/ /pubmed/36864074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28988-0 Text en © Crown 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Marriott Haresign, I. Phillips, E. A. M. Whitehorn, M. Lamagna, F. Eliano, M. Goupil, L. Jones, E. J. H. Wass, S. V. Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title | Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title_full | Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title_fullStr | Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title_full_unstemmed | Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title_short | Gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
title_sort | gaze onsets during naturalistic infant-caregiver interaction associate with ‘sender’ but not ‘receiver’ neural responses, and do not lead to changes in inter-brain synchrony |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9981599/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36864074 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28988-0 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT marriottharesigni gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT phillipseam gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT whitehornm gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT lamagnaf gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT elianom gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT goupill gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT jonesejh gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony AT wasssv gazeonsetsduringnaturalisticinfantcaregiverinteractionassociatewithsenderbutnotreceiverneuralresponsesanddonotleadtochangesininterbrainsynchrony |