The Social and Emotional Brain, Lecture 7 Flashcards

1
Q

The Social Brain Hypothesis

A

Human primates have unusually large brains for body size.
Brain is one of the most “expensive” organs in terms of running costs.
It has evolved to deal with the complex information we are presented with in a largely social world.
Computational demands of living in large, complex societies that selected for large brains.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Social Cognition

A

Focus on how people process, store and apply information about other people and social situations.
We infer, interpret, encode, decode social information and social situations.
Includes perception of emotions and facial expressions, perception of eye gaze direction of others, prediction of the thoughts underlying the behavior of others.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Reading Faces

A

Faces are not only a subject for visual perception because they are social objects, and they carry information about another person’s emotional states, intentions (eye-gaze), membership in social categories (race, gender), disposition (trustworthiness).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Capgras Syndrome

A

A person believes that their loved ones have been replaced by identical looking imposters or body-doubles.
Consciously recognize the person but lack emotional response to them (Ellis & Young, 1990).

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Is Face Processing Innate?

A

Fantz, 1961 - “looking chamber” demonstrated that infants preferred the real face, looked slightly less at the scrambled face and ignored the control pattern.
Johnson et al., 1991: Newborns were tested within an hour after birth. Results showed that Newborns also orient to face-like patterns. Newborns are sensitive to the structure of the human face.
Reid et al., 2017 examined fetal head turns to visually presented to upright and inverted face-like stimuli. Dots/Squares are enough to elicit responses to facial configuration – used red lights as it penetrates the tissue. ALSO used ultrasound to see how the baby behaves when light is shone.
Results: Fetuses (at around 34 weeks of gestation) are more likely to engage with stimuli featuring an upright face-like configuration than with an inverted configuration.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Visual system development in infants and innate preference for faces:

A

EEG/ERP and fMRI studies show that the large-scale organization of visual brain areas in 4-6-month-old infants is already like adult brains but is subsequently refined through development (experience, maturation).
Infants can detect faces in around 290ms (N290 – infant version of the N170, a face-specific component).
Foetuses (at around 34 weeks of gestation) are more likely to engage with stimuli featuring an upright face-like configuration than with an inverted configuration.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Facial expression recognition:

A

FNIRS study by Di Lorenzo et al., 2019 with 5-month-old participants showed that the right occipital area selectively responds to faces, indicating activation of the face processing network at 5 months. However, sensitivity to facial emotions is immature at this age.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Visual cliff experiment and social referencing:

A

Sorce et al., 1985, found that 12-month-old infants could decode emotional expressions and use them for decision making in the visual cliff experiment.
Caregiver’s facial expression of emotion influences the infants’ decision, known as social referencing.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Eye gaze detection in social cognition:

A

Information from the eye region is a key social cue for understanding others, including distinguishing between emotions, establishing dyadic communication, orienting attention to critical objects, and giving clues about intention.
From around 4 months, infants can shift direction of their eyes to look at someone’s face, and newborns prefer to look at faces that engage them in mutual gaze.
Baron-Cohen et al., 1995, found that individuals with autism have intact perception of eye gaze but have difficulty using eye gaze information to predict behavior.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Brain Bases of Eye-Gaze Detection
Study: Hoffman & Haxby, 2000

A

Findings:

STS (Superior Temporal Sulcus) is activated in the eye gaze detection task. It is involved in changeable features. Lesions impair the ability to detect gaze direction.
FFA (Fusiform Face Area) is activated in the face identity task. It processes unchangeable features of facial features.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Brain Bases of Eye-Gaze Detection
Study: Pelphrey et al., 2005

A

Findings:

Participants (typically developing and autistic) show STS activity in the eye-gaze detection task.
Autistic participants show no difference between incongruent versus incongruent trials, indicating that perception of gaze shift is not linked with its mentalistic significance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Reading Minds

A

Definition: Empathy is an emotional reaction to our understanding of another person’s feelings, and the ability to infer emotional experiences. It has two components: affective and cognitive.

Mechanisms/Theories:

Mirroring (Simulation Theory, ST) - affective component
Mentalising (Theory of Mind, TOM) - cognitive component

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Mentalising and Theory of Mind (ToM)

A

Definition: Mentalising is the ability to infer mental states (desires, feelings) and intentions of others. ToM is concerned with the cognitive aspects of empathy, such as reasoning about mental states and attributing mental states to others.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Study: Vollm et al., 2005

A

Findings:

Both empathy and ToM activate the medial prefrontal cortex, temporoparietal junction, and temporal poles.
ToM-specific activity occurs in the orbitofrontal cortex.
Empathy-specific activity occurs in the amygdala.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

What are the temporal lobes involved in?

A

Language and semantic memory, possibly representing/activating semantic schemas that specify current social and emotional contexts.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

What is the parieto-temporal junction activated by?

A

Perception and biological motion, including eye-gaze, moving mouth, and living things, and may have a role in detecting other agents.

17
Q

What is the medial pre-frontal cortex activated by?

A

Thinking about people than thinking about objects and more activated by thinking about minds than thinking about physical characteristics. It may have a role in binding together different kinds of information, such as actions, agents, goals, beliefs, etc.

18
Q

False Belief Tasks

A

Definition: False belief tasks involve decoupling the state of someone’s mind (e.g., what they believe) from the state of the world (e.g., what they perceive). Participants must predict a person’s behavior based on the person’s false belief while ignoring their own true belief.

Note: Participants in false belief tasks typically must predict a person’s behavior based on the person’s false belief while ignoring their own true belief.

19
Q

Sally-Anne Task

A

Question: “Where will Sally look for her ball?”
Correct answer: “in the basket”
Typically developed children until about 4-5 years will say “in the box”.
Conclusion: they cannot yet form a representation of other persons mental state.

20
Q

Sally-Anne Task – Criticism

A

False belief tasks not only involve representing others’ mental states
Involves inhibition and problem solving – Specifically, they need to deal with two conflicting representations: Sally’s (false) belief that the ball is in the basket. Their own (true) belief that the ball is in the box.
ToM may be present earlier, but we can’t measure it using a traditional false belief task
Alternative “skill” tests that even younger children are good at: Giving and taking (14-18 months – Repacholi & Gopnik 1997); Looking (7 months, Kovacs, Teglas & Endress, 2010).

21
Q

Repacholi & Gopnik, 1997

A

A food-request procedure was used to explore the understanding of other people’s desires in 14- and 18-month-olds.
Children observed an experimenter expressing disgust as she/he tasted 1 type of food and happiness as she/he tasted another type of food.
Then the experimenter asked for some food – can children consider the experimenter preference?
Hypotheses: If children can’t consider the experimenter’s desire, then they will offer whichever food they themselves preferred; If children will infer that the experimenter wanted the food associated with her/his prior positive affect, then they understand that the experimenter’s desires might differ from their own.
Results: 14-month-olds: 54% gave the preferred food to the experimenter; 18-month-olds: 92% gave the preferred food to the experimenter.

22
Q

Smurf Study (Kovacs, Teglas & Endress, 2010)

A

Idea: if social information processing and ToM abilities are so important (and possibly innate) then computing others’ beliefs should be spontaneous and automatic; and others’ beliefs should be computed online and effortlessly.
7-month-old infants – infants’ surprise was measured indicated by longer looking time.
Conditions: True belief: smurf and participant has the same knowledge. Outcome is not surprising for either; False belief: smurf and participant has different knowledge. Outcome is surprising for smurf but not for participant.
Results: Surprise reaction when the outcome was not in line with the smurf’s belief (but in line with infant’s belief)
Conclusion: The beliefs of the agent influenced the infants’ looking behaviour, even though they clashed with the infant’s own beliefs. Infants computed the agents (smurf’s) belief.