Oxytocin modulates human communication by enhancing cognitive exploration.

Oxytocin is a neuropeptide known to influence how humans share material resources. Here we explore whether oxytocin influences how we share knowledge. We focus on two distinguishing features of human communication, namely the ability to select communicative signals that disambiguate the many-to-many mappings that exist between a signal's form and meaning, and adjustments of those signals to the presumed cognitive characteristics of the addressee ("audience design"). Fifty-five males participated in a randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled experiment involving the intranasal administration of oxytocin. The participants produced novel non-verbal communicative signals towards two different addressees, an adult or a child, in an experimentally-controlled live interactive setting. We found that oxytocin administration drives participants to generate signals of higher referential quality, i.e. signals that disambiguate more communicative problems; and to rapidly adjust those communicative signals to what the addressee understands. The combined effects of oxytocin on referential quality and audience design fit with the notion that oxytocin administration leads participants to explore more pervasively behaviors that can convey their intention, and diverse models of the addressees. These findings suggest that, besides affecting prosocial drive and salience of social cues, oxytocin influences how we share knowledge by promoting cognitive exploration.

Oxytocin reduces amygdala responses during threat approach.

Oxytocin reduces amygdala responses to threatening social stimuli in males and has been suggested to facilitate approach-related processing by either decreasing anxiety or intensifying salience. The current administration study tested whether oxytocin either reduces or enhances amygdala responses during threat approach in a placebo-controlled randomized, double-blind, between-subjects design with 52 healthy males undergoing fMRI during a social approach-avoidance task. Oxytocin decreased amygdala activation during threat approach and not during threat avoidance. This neural effect supports oxytocin's social anxiolytic effects and provides a neuroendocrine mechanism promoting social approach. The findings may yield clinical implications for individuals suffering from dysregulations of social approach such as patients with anxiety disorders.

Eye'm talking to you: speakers' gaze direction modulates co-speech gesture processing in the right MTG.

Recipients process information from speech and co-speech gestures, but it is currently unknown how this processing is influenced by the presence of other important social cues, especially gaze direction, a marker of communicative intent. Such cues may modulate neural activity in regions associated either with the processing of ostensive cues, such as eye gaze, or with the processing of semantic information, provided by speech and gesture. Participants were scanned (fMRI) while taking part in triadic communication involving two recipients and a speaker. The speaker uttered sentences that were and were not accompanied by complementary iconic gestures. Crucially, the speaker alternated her gaze direction, thus creating two recipient roles: addressed (direct gaze) vs unaddressed (averted gaze) recipient. The comprehension of Speech&Gesture relative to SpeechOnly utterances recruited middle occipital, middle temporal and inferior frontal gyri, bilaterally. The calcarine sulcus and posterior cingulate cortex were sensitive to differences between direct and averted gaze. Most importantly, Speech&Gesture utterances, but not SpeechOnly utterances, produced additional activity in the right middle temporal gyrus when participants were addressed. Marking communicative intent with gaze direction modulates the processing of speech-gesture utterances in cerebral areas typically associated with the semantic processing of multi-modal communicative acts.

Synchronized drumming enhances activity in the caudate and facilitates prosocial commitment--if the rhythm comes easily.

Why does chanting, drumming or dancing together make people feel united? Here we investigate the neural mechanisms underlying interpersonal synchrony and its subsequent effects on prosocial behavior among synchronized individuals. We hypothesized that areas of the brain associated with the processing of reward would be active when individuals experience synchrony during drumming, and that these reward signals would increase prosocial behavior toward this synchronous drum partner. 18 female non-musicians were scanned with functional magnetic resonance imaging while they drummed a rhythm, in alternating blocks, with two different experimenters: one drumming in-synchrony and the other out-of-synchrony relative to the participant. In the last scanning part, which served as the experimental manipulation for the following prosocial behavioral test, one of the experimenters drummed with one half of the participants in-synchrony and with the other out-of-synchrony. After scanning, this experimenter "accidentally" dropped eight pencils, and the number of pencils collected by the participants was used as a measure of prosocial commitment. Results revealed that participants who mastered the novel rhythm easily before scanning showed increased activity in the caudate during synchronous drumming. The same area also responded to monetary reward in a localizer task with the same participants. The activity in the caudate during experiencing synchronous drumming also predicted the number of pencils the participants later collected to help the synchronous experimenter of the manipulation run. In addition, participants collected more pencils to help the experimenter when she had drummed in-synchrony than out-of-synchrony during the manipulation run. By showing an overlap in activated areas during synchronized drumming and monetary reward, our findings suggest that interpersonal synchrony is related to the brain's reward system.

Granger causality mapping during joint actions reveals evidence for forward models that could overcome sensory-motor delays.

Studies investigating joint actions have suggested a central role for the putative mirror neuron system (pMNS) because of the close link between perception and action provided by these brain regions [1], [2], [3]. In contrast, our previous functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) experiment demonstrated that the BOLD response of the pMNS does not suggest that it directly integrates observed and executed actions during joint actions [4]. To test whether the pMNS might contribute indirectly to the integration process by sending information to brain areas responsible for this integration (integration network), here we used Granger causality mapping (GCM) [5]. We explored the directional information flow between the anterior sites of the pMNS and previously identified integrative brain regions. We found that the left BA44 sent more information than it received to both the integration network (left thalamus, right middle occipital gyrus and cerebellum) and more posterior nodes of the pMNS (BA2). Thus, during joint actions, two anatomically separate networks therefore seem effectively connected and the information flow is predominantly from anterior to posterior areas of the brain. These findings suggest that the pMNS is involved indirectly in joint actions by transforming observed and executed actions into a common code and is part of a generative model that could predict the future somatosensory and visual consequences of observed and executed actions in order to overcome otherwise inevitable neural delays.

Acting together in and beyond the mirror neuron system.

Moving a set dinner table often takes two people, and doing so without spilling the glasses requires the close coordination of the two agents' actions. It has been argued that the mirror neuron system may be the key neural locus of such coordination. Instead, here we show that such coordination recruits two separable sets of areas: one that could translate between motor and visual codes and one that could integrate these information to achieve common goals. The former includes regions of the putative mirror neuron system, the latter, regions of the prefrontal, posterior parietal and temporal lobe adjacent to the putative mirror neuron system. Both networks were more active while participants cooperated with a human agent, responding to their actions, compared to a computer that did not, evidencing their social dimension. This finding shows that although the putative mirror neuron system can play a critical role in joint actions by translating both agents' actions into a common code, the flexible remapping of our own actions with those of others required during joint actions seems to be performed outside of the putative mirror neuron system.