Resonating with Others: The Effects of Self-Construal Type on Motor Cortical Output

Abstract

"Self-construal" refers to how individuals view and make meaning of the self, and at least two subtypes have been identified. Interdependent self-construal is a view of the self that includes relationships with others, and independent self-construal is a view of the self that does not include relations with others. It has been suggested that priming these two types of self-construal affects the cognitive processing style that an individual adopts, especially with regard to context sensitivity. Specifically, an interdependent self-construal is thought to promote attention to others and social context to a greater degree than an independent self-construal. To investigate this assertion, we elicited motor-evoked potentials with transcranial magnetic stimulation during an action observation task in which human participants were presented with either interdependent or independent self-construal prime words. Priming interdependent self-construal increased motor cortical output whereas priming independent self-construal did not, compared with a no-priming baseline condition. These effects, likely mediated by changes in the mirror system, essentially tune the individual to, or shield the individual from, social input. Interestingly, the pattern of these self-construal-induced changes in the motor system corroborates with previously observed selfconstrual effects on overt behavioral mimicry in social settings, and as such, our results provide strong evidence that motor resonance likely mediates nonconscious mimicry in social settings. Finally, these self-construal effects may lead to the development of interventions for disorders of deficient or excessive social influence, like certain autism spectrum and compulsive imitative disorders.

Top-down social modulation of interpersonal observation–execution

“…Specifically, the aforementioned processes are suggested to generate top-down control signals that regulate the lower-level visuomotor mechanisms (mirror system) controlling automatic imitation and mimicry as shown using TMS (Hogeveen & Obhi, 2012;Obhi et al, 2011) and fMRI (Wang & Hamilton, 2014;Wang, Ramsey et al, 2011).…”

“…The analysis indicated an interaction between eye-gaze direction Social modulation of motor contagion 5 and interconnections between medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC), superior temporal sulcus (STS) and mirror system. Medial prefrontal cortex is thought to provide top-down control (Wang & Hamilton, 2014) of input to superior temporal sulcus and thereby the processing of biological motion (Allison, Puce, & McCarthy, 2000), as well as the mirror system, where direct visuomotor mapping of an the observed biological action is implemented during mimicry and automatic imitation (e.g., Cook & Bird, 2011;Leighton et al, 2010;Obhi, Hogeveen, & Pascual-Leone, 2011;.…”

“…Like automatic imitation and mimicry, motor interference during interpersonal observation-execution is linked to superior temporal sulcus Social modulation of motor contagion 6 and the mirror system (Blakemore & Frith, 2005;Press, Cook, Blakemore, & Kilner, 2011), both of which are implicated in processing biological motion kinematics. Therefore, following a pro-social (e.g., together) or anti-social (e.g., independent) prime word Obhi et al, 2011), participants executed cyclical horizontal arm movements across the mid-line of the body while simultaneously observing a horizontal or curvilinear model displaying biological motion kinematics. The horizontal stimulus displays a movement with a congruent horizontal trajectory and congruent spatial end-points.…”

Social Interaction Enhances Motor Resonance for Observed Human Actions

“…The optimal location was marked on a Lycra swim cap worn by participants, and a mechanical arm was used to hold the coil in a fixed position. Once the optimal location for MEPs was identified, stimulator output was lowered at 2% intervals until the minimum intensity capable of eliciting MEPs of ϳ1 mV peak-topeak amplitude on 50% of TMS pulses had been identified (Lepage et al, 2010;Obhi et al, 2011). Stimulator output was held constant at this intensity for the rest of the experiment (i.e., baseline and action observation blocks), ranging from 55% to 83% (mean, 64%) in the present sample.…”

“…Motor resonance (MR) is the activation of matching motor representations during observation of action(s) made by others, and could index mirror activity within the wider AON (Fadiga et al, 1995(Fadiga et al, , 2005Cross et al, 2010;Press, 2011). The mirror system is also implicated in automatic imitation and action observation tasks (Iacoboni, 2009;Obhi and Hogeveen, 2010;Heyes, 2011;Hogeveen and Obhi, 2011;Obhi et al, 2011). We refer to the mirror and wider AON mechanisms enabling motor resonance as "the motor resonance system (MR system)."…”