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
Abstract 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 gazeonsetsas 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..
| Medienart: |
|
|---|
Preprint| Erscheinungsjahr: |
2024 |
|---|---|
| Erschienen: |
2024 |
| Enthalten in: |
bioRxiv.org - (2024) vom: 23. Apr. Zur Gesamtaufnahme - year:2024 |
|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
|---|
| Beteiligte Personen: |
Marriott Haresign, I. [VerfasserIn] |
|---|
| Links: |
|---|
| Themen: |
|---|
| doi: |
10.1101/2022.05.27.493545 |
|---|
| funding: |
|
|---|---|
| Förderinstitution / Projekttitel: |
|
| PPN (Katalog-ID): |
XBI036134589 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | XBI036134589 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20240425104819.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220531s2024 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1101/2022.05.27.493545 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)XBI036134589 | ||
| 035 | |a (biorXiv)10.1101/2022.05.27.493545 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Marriott Haresign, I. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a 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 |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2024 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Abstract 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 gazeonsetsas 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. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Biology |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
| 650 | 4 | |a 570 |7 (dpeaa)DE-84 | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Phillips, E.A.M |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Whitehorn, M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Lamagna, F. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Eliano, M. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Goupil, L. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Jones, E.J.H. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Wass, S.V. |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t bioRxiv.org |g (2024) vom: 23. Apr. |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g year:2024 |g day:23 |g month:04 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-28988-0 |x 0 |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2022.05.27.493545 |x 0 |z kostenfrei |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_XBI | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |j 2024 |b 23 |c 04 | ||