Spoken language is an innate ability of the human being and represents the most widespread mode of social communication. The ability to share concepts, intentions and feelings, and also to respond to what others are feeling/saying is crucial during social interactions. A growing body of evidence suggests that language evolved from manual gestures, gradually incorporating motor acts with vocal elements. In this evolutionary context, the human mirror mechanism (MM) would permit the passage from “doing something” to “communicating it to someone else.” In this perspective, the MM would mediate semantic processes being involved in both the execution and in the understanding of messages expressed by words or gestures. Thus, the recognition of action related words would activate somatosensory regions, reflecting the semantic grounding of these symbols in action information. Here, the role of the sensorimotor cortex and in general of the human MM on both language perception and understanding is addressed, focusing on recent studies on the integration between symbolic gestures and speech. We conclude documenting some evidence about MM in coding also the emotional aspects conveyed by manual, facial and body signals during communication, and how they act in concert with language to modulate other’s message comprehension and behavior, in line with an “embodied” and integrated view of social interaction.
22 November 2017 in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
During social interaction, actions, and words may be expressed in different ways, for example, gently or rudely. A handshake can be gentle or vigorous and, similarly, tone of voice can be pleasant or rude. These aspects of social communication have been named vitality forms by Daniel Stern. Vitality forms represent how an action is performed and characterize all human interactions. In spite of their importance in social life, to date it is not clear whether the vitality forms expressed by the agent can influence the execution of a subsequent action performed by the receiver. To shed light on this matter, in the present study we carried out a kinematic study aiming to assess whether and how visual and auditory properties of vitality forms expressed by others influenced the motor response of participants. In particular, participants were presented with video-clips showing a male and a female actor performing a “giving request” (give me) or a “taking request” (take it) in visual, auditory, and mixed modalities (visual and auditory). Most importantly, requests were expressed with rude or gentle vitality forms. After the actor's request, participants performed a subsequent action. Results showed that vitality forms expressed by the actors influenced the kinematic parameters of the participants' actions regardless to the modality by which they are conveyed.
It is well known that the kinematics of an action is modulated by the underlying motor intention. In turn, kinematics serves as a cue also during action observation, providing hints about the intention of the observed action. However, an open question is whether decoding others’ intentions on the basis of their kinematics depends solely on how much the kinematics varies across different actions, or rather it is also influenced by its similarity with the observer motor repertoire. The execution of reach-to-grasp and place actions, differing for target size and context, was recorded in terms of upper-limb kinematics in 21 volunteers and in an actor. Volunteers had later to observe the sole reach-to-grasp phase of the actor’s actions, and predict the underlying intention. The potential benefit of the kinematic actor-participant similarity for recognition accuracy was evaluated. In execution, both target size and context modulated specific kinematic parameters. More importantly, although participants performed above chance in intention recognition, the similarity of motor patterns positively correlated with recognition accuracy. Overall, these data indicate that kinematic similarity exerts a facilitative role in intention recognition, providing further support to the view of action intention recognition as a visuo-motor process grounded in motor resonance.