Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T03:05:57.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Costs and benefits of communicating vigor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 September 2021

Cristina Becchio Open the ORCID record for Cristina Becchio [Opens in a new window] ,
Kiri Pullar  and
Stefano Panzeri
Cristina Becchio
Affiliation:
Cognition, Motion & Neuroscience, Center for Human Technologies, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16152Genoa, [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/cristina-becchio; [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/kiri-pullar;
Kiri Pullar
Affiliation:
Cognition, Motion & Neuroscience, Center for Human Technologies, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16152Genoa, [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/cristina-becchio; [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/kiri-pullar; Neural Computation Laboratory, Center for Human Technologies, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16152Genoa, Italy. [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/stefano-panzeri
Stefano Panzeri
Affiliation:
Neural Computation Laboratory, Center for Human Technologies, Istituto Italiano di Tecnologia, 16152Genoa, Italy. [email protected]; https://www.iit.it/people/stefano-panzeri
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Why do we run toward people we love, but only walk toward others? One reason is to let them know we love them. In this commentary, we elaborate on how subjective utility information encoded in vigor is read out by others. We consider the potential implications for understanding and modeling the link between movements and decisions in social environments.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 44 , 2021 , e124
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becchio, C., Koul, A., Ansuini, C., Bertone, C., & Cavallo, A. (2018). Seeing mental states: An experimental strategy for measuring the observability of other minds. Physics of Life Reviews, 24, 67–80. doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2017.10.002.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cavallo, A., Koul, A., Ansuini, C., Capozzi, F., & Becchio, C. (2016). Decoding intentions from movement kinematics. Science Reports, 6, 37036. doi: 10.1038/srep37036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chouchourelou, A., Matsuka, T., Harber, K., & Shiffrar, M. (2006). The visual analysis of emotional actions. Social Neuroscience, 1(1), 63–74. doi: 10.1080/17470910600630599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grezes, J., Frith, C., & Passingham, R. E. (2004). Brain mechanisms for inferring deceit in the actions of others. Journal of Neuroscience, 24(24), 5500–5505. doi: 10.1523/jneurosci.0219-04.2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hall, K., Oram, M. W., Campbell, M. W., Eppley, T. M., Byrne, R. W., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2017). Chimpanzee uses manipulative gaze cues to conceal and reveal information to foraging competitor. American Journal of Primatology, 79(3), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajp.22622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Latash, M. L. (2012). The bliss (not the problem) of motor abundance (not redundancy). Experimental Brain Research, 217(1), 1–5. doi: 10.1007/s00221-012-3000-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Manera, V., Becchio, C., Cavallo, A., Sartori, L., & Castiello, U. (2011). Cooperation or competition? Discriminating between social intentions by observing prehensile movements. Experimental Brain Research, 211(3–4), 547–556. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2649-4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Panzeri, S., Harvey, C. D., Piasini, E., Latham, P. E., & Fellin, T. (2017). Cracking the neural code for sensory perception by combining statistics, intervention, and behavior. Neuron, 93(3), 491–507. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2016.12.036.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Patri, J.-F., Cavallo, A., Pullar, K., Soriano, M., Valente, M., Koul, A., … Becchio, C. (2020). Transient disruption of the inferior parietal lobule impairs the ability to attribute intention to action. Current Biology, 30, 4594–4605. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2020.08.104.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pica, G., Piasini, E., Safaai, H., Runyan, C. A., Diamond, M. E., Fellin, T., … Panzeri, S. (2017). Quantifying how much sensory information in a neural code is relevant for behavior. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (Nips 2017), 3686–3696.Google Scholar
Runeson, S., & Frykholm, G. (1983). Kinematic specification of dynamics as an informational basis for person-and-action perception: Expectation, gender recognition, and deceptive intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 112(4), 585–615. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.112.4.585.vCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sackaloo, K., Strouse, E., & Rice, M. S. (2015). Degree of preference and its influence on motor control when reaching for most preferred, neutrally preferred, and least preferred candy. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 35(2), 81–88. doi: 10.1177/1539449214561763.Google ScholarPubMed
Stephens, D. W., Brown, J. S., & Ydenberg, R. C. (2007). Foraging: Behavior and ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summerside, E. M., Shadmehr, R., & Ahmed, A. A. (2018). Vigor of reaching movements: Reward discounts the cost of effort. Journal of Neurophysiology, 119(6), 2347–2357. doi: 10.1152/jn.00872.2017.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van der Wel, R. P. R. D., Sebanz, N., & Knoblich, G. (2014). Do people automatically track others’ beliefs? Evidence from a continuous measure. Cognition, 130(1), 128–133. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.10.004.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed