Yearning to yawn: the neural basis of contagious yawning

An investigation of auditory contagious yawning

“…Yawn sounds received significantly higher urge-to-yawn ratings (mean rating 2.2, 0.1 standard error [SEM ]) than did either the scrambled yawns [1.6,0.2 SEM;t(9) 4.20, p .002] or breaths [1.5,0.1 SEM;t(9) 3.69, p .005]. These overall rating patterns are in agreement with those obtained from postexperimental self-report data describing the level of yawn urges in response to visual stimuli (Schürmann et al, 2005). In that fMRI study, postexperimental tendency-toyawn ratings for yawn and non-yawn videos were found to be 2.8 ( 0.2 SEM) and 1.4 ( 0.1 SEM), respectively, using a 5-point scale.…”

“…Thus, for any given Y stimulus, there existed a corresponding X stimulus that had virtually the same amplitude, overall temporal envelope information, and frequency content (with the exception of a small amount of transi-sistent with that reported in the previous f MRI study (Schürmann et al, 2005). Although that study discouraged yawning behavior through the use of neck braces, participants in the present study were also discouraged through experimental requests to not induce any head/ body motion.…”

“…Specifically, the amount of hemodynamic activity associated with highly rated yawn and breath stimuli, but not scrambled yawns, were found to be positively correlated with Empathy Quotient scores (Pearson correlation values of .57 and .66, respectively; p .05 and .04, respectively, one-tailed; n 9 owing to the fact that 1 participant did not produce enough Y3, B3, or X3 ing, for instance, is also a contagious behavior (Provine, 2005) that can invoke right pIFG activity during both its perception and expression (Meyer, Baumann, Wildgruber, & Alter, 2007). Similarly, the tongue-in-cheek control condition used by Schürmann et al (2005) may also have elicited an imitation neural response, given that human MNs are believed to respond even to movements that are not goal directed (Rizzolatti & Craighero, 2004). Indeed, when the results from that study are reexamined, pIFG activation is noticeably present for both the yawn and tongue stimuli (Schürmann et al, 2005, Figure 2, p. 1262.…”

“…contagious yawning (Platek et al, 2005;Schürmann et al, 2005) have called this hypothesis into question, leading to speculation that cells in the pIFG seem to be circumvented when a yawn is observed. It is possible, however, that contagious yawn-related hemodynamic activity in those studies was obscured by issues of experimental design (e.g., block designs and task requirements) that rendered it impossible to selectively average only those yawn stimuli that actually elicited an urge to yawn in each participant.…”

Video-induced yawning in stumptail macaques (Macaca arctoides)

“…The likelihood of yawning in response to video images of yawning is positively correlated with measures of empathy and visual self-recognition (Platek et al 2003). Recent studies investigating the neural correlates of contagious yawning also support the empathy hypothesis in that activation was found in areas related to selfprocessing when viewing someone yawn (Platek et al 2005), but not in the human mirror neuron system, which suggests that yawning is not a truly imitative act (Schü rmann et al 2005). Since there is convincing evidence for both self-recognition and empathy in chimpanzees but not in monkeys (De Waal 1996;Anderson & Gallup 1999), it may be predicted that, unlike chimpanzees and humans, monkeys do not show contagious yawning.…”