Vitality form expression in autism.

The notion of "vitality form" has been coined by Daniel Stern to describe the basic features of action, which may reflect the mood or affective state of an agent. There is general consensus that vitality forms substantiate social interactions in children as well in adults. Previous studies have explored children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)'s ability in copying and recognizing the vitality forms of actions performed by others. In this paper we investigated, for the first time, how children with ASD express different vitality forms when acting themselves. We recorded the kinematics of ASD and typically developing (TD) children while performing three different types of action with two different vitality forms. There were two conditions. In the what condition we contrasted the three different types of action performed with a same vitality form, while in the how condition we contrasted the same type of action performed with two different vitality forms. The results showed a clear difference between ASD children and TD children in the how, but not in the what, condition. Indeed, while TD children distinguished the vitality forms to be expressed by mostly varying a specific spatiotemporal parameter (i.e. movement time), no significant variation in this parameter was found in ASD children. As they are not prone to express vitality forms as neurotypical individuals do, individuals with ASD's interactions with neurotypical peers could therefore be difficult to achieve successfully, with cascading effects on their propensity to be tuned to their surrounding social world, or so we conjecture. If this conjecture would turn out to be correct, our findings could have promising implication for theoretical and clinical research in the context of ASD.

Fine tuned modulation of the motor system by adjectives expressing positive and negative properties.

Using transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), motor evoked potentials (MEPs) were recorded from two antagonistic muscles, the first dorsal interosseus (FDI) of the hand and the extensor communis digitorum (EC) of the forearm. FDI is involved in grasping actions and EC in releasing. TMS pulses were delivered while participants were reading adjectives expressing either negative or positive pragmatic properties, at 150 ms after presentation of language material. Overall findings showed an interaction of adjective type (positive, negative) and muscle (FDI, EC), the effect being driven by a significant difference for negative adjectives. Further analysis aimed at investigating the effectiveness of positive adjectives showed a similar, but opposite, pattern of effects for the positive words in the initial two blocks. The present results indicate that, as for verbs and nouns, adjectives recruit the sensorimotor system, and their processing is best explained by an embodiment rather than an amodal approach to language.