Interactive Psychometrics for Autism With the Human Dynamic Clamp: Interpersonal Synchrony From Sensorimotor to Sociocognitive Domains

Abstract

The human dynamic clamp (HDC) is a human–machine interface designed on the basis of coordination dynamics for studying realistic social interaction under controlled and reproducible conditions. Here, we propose to probe the validity of the HDC as a psychometric instrument for quantifying social abilities in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and neurotypical development. To study interpersonal synchrony with the HDC, we derived five standardized scores following a gradient from sensorimotor and motor to higher sociocognitive skills in a sample of 155 individuals (113 participants with ASD, 42 typically developing participants; aged 5 to 25 years; IQ > 70). Regression analyses were performed using normative modeling on global scores according to four subconditions (HDC behavior “cooperative/competitive,” human task “in-phase/anti-phase,” diagnosis, and age at inclusion). Children with ASD had lower scores than controls for motor skills. HDC motor coordination scores were the best candidates for stratification and diagnostic biomarkers according to exploratory analyses of hierarchical clustering and multivariate classification. Independently of phenotype, sociocognitive skills increased with developmental age while being affected by the ongoing task and HDC behavior. Weaker performance in ASD for motor skills suggests the convergent validity of the HDC for evaluating social interaction. Results provided additional evidence of a relationship between sensorimotor and sociocognitive skills. HDC may also be used as a marker of maturation of sociocognitive skills during real-time social interaction. Through its standardized and objective evaluation, the HDC not only represents a valid paradigm for the study of interpersonal synchrony but also offers a promising, clinically relevant psychometric instrument for the evaluation and stratification of sociomotor dysfunctions.

Integration and Causality in Enactive Approaches to Psychiatry

“…Embodied and enactive perspectives on social cognition emphasize the importance of movement coordination of one's body with the other person while performing actions (socialmotor coordination) (130)(131)(132)(133). As noted in previous sections, children with ASD have difficulties in social communication skills, some of which may be due to motor deficits (found in 50-80% of children diagnosed with ASD) (134)(135)(136).…”

“…This set-up allows a dynamic bidirectional interaction in real time between a human and a virtual avatar (modeled on human-human interaction) ( 76 , 144 ). Using this method, Baillin et al ( 136 ) studied behavioral aspects of interpersonal synchrony in ASD, considering several variables, including motor control and emotion recognition.…”

On the coordination dynamics of (animate) moving bodies

“…The foregoing model system (equations ( 1) through ( 4)) reproduced the main experimental phenomena observed and predicted other properties such as increased relaxation times (critical slowing) and fluctuation enhancement as the transition is approached (see Fuchs 2013, Kelso 2009/2013 for reviews). There have been very many detailed mathematical developments of the so-called full HKB model ((1) to ( 4)), along with further experimental predictions and applications (for recent examples, see Cass and Hogan 2021, Leise and Cohen 2007, Slowi ński et al 2018, 2020. The main focus here, however, is conceptual, and only the basic elements of the HKB style of modeling are included.…”

“…A further practical, but rather worthwhile development is to use the HDC as a tool to quantify social abilities in children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In a group of 113 ASD participants, the HDC (here based on the HKB model) was shown to provide an accurate assessment of real-time social coordination, hence providing a clinical instrument to evaluate ASD and other neurodevelopmental disorders (Baillin et al 2020). For possible applications, this is just the tip of the iceberg: HKB coupling has been used to investigate social behavior between humans and small groups of simulated autonomous agents (Nalepka et al 2017(Nalepka et al , 2019 as well as provide a basis for situated robotics (Aguilera et al 2013, Cass and Hogan 2021 for recent analysis and review).…”

The Haken–Kelso–Bunz (HKB) model: from matter to movement to mind

“…(5) some, mostly physicists, think that the main impact of HKB is that it led to the discovery of phase transitions in the human brain; (6) others (such as the late Esther Thelen) thought that the concepts, methods and tools that arose from HKB were a highly generative system for understanding human development in general; (7) by demonstrating self-organization in the movements of human beings HKB generalized a physical (inanimate) concept to (animate) intentional systems. This border between the animate and the inanimate seems worthy of further exploration; (8) the HKB model is not only the conceptual but also the operational foundation of an entirely new approach to the study of human behavior, aptly coined Coordination Dynamics; (9) HKB led to technical innovations such as virtual partner interaction (VPI) or the human dynamic clamp (HDC) that has proven a useful tool to parametrically explore the neural underpinnings of social interaction as well as social cognition, e.g., in autism (Baillin, et al, 2020); (10) whereas it was often assumed that cognition is a computational process, HKB offered cognitive scientists a different picture leading many to suggest that dynamical systems are a better way to account for real-time cognitive performance than purely computational/representational approaches (see also below); (11) the mix of an intriguing empirical phenomenon in the form of a phase transition and the conceptual and formal machinery of synergetics and nonlinear dynamics is a, if not the main reason for the impact of the HKB model; and (12) science plus sociological reasons will influence the long-term impact of HKB, such as standing practices of academic education and the interdisciplinary training of young scientists.…”