CA meeting Athens 2007 Raymond Cuijpers Ellen de Bruijn Hein van Schie Roger Newman-Norlund Majken Hulstijn Jurjen Bosga Ruud Meulenbroek Harold Bekkering

Introduction Classical picture: Motor output Motor Processing Sensory Processing Sensory information Reasoning Percept Motor plan Planning

Modern picture Motor system involved in action observation (MNS) Perception biased by action planning Already partly incorporated in architecture of UMP Motor output Motor Processing Sensory Processing Sensory information Reasoning Percept Motor plan Planning Motor plan

Division of labour in WP2 Joint reasoning: action observation and action planning (Hein van Schie, Roger Newman-Norlund, Raymond Cuijpers) Joint attention: task dependent visual processing (Astros Chatziastros) Joint co-ordination: coordination of body kinetics and kinematics (Jurjen Bosga, Ruud Meulenbroek, Majken Hulstijn) Error monitoring and learning (Ellen de Bruijn) Sensory Proc. Sensory information Reasoning Motor output Motor Proc. Planning World knowledge, Personal prefs. Error monitoring

Modeling action observation and action planning Raymond Cuijpers

Dynamics and short-term memory of goal inference Results Adds short-term memory Dynamics similar to linear regime of neural field approach (UMP) Explore differences and similarities: effect on behaviour? Present model - No memory - Sensitive to noise Improved model - Dynamic smoothing Probability fields ReasoningPlanning World knowledge, Personal prefs. implementation ‘How can we improve the internal mechanism of our computational model?’

A main advantage of goal inference is anticipation of events Previous studies showed that the eye leads the hand when performing and observing a well- known action According to our model anticipation depends on knowledge about the goal Anticipation in action observation ‘How is goal knowledge used for anticipation during action observation?’

Observation of goals and means in joint action Hein van Schie

Automatic interference effects of observed action goals and means on motor performance In uncolored trials movement preparation is faster after goal cueing (pointing) than after means cueing (grip). In colored trials irrelevant postures affect response preparation (congruency effects). The interference of irrelevant goals in means trials is stronger than the interference of irrelevant means in goal trials. ‘How does observation of action goals and action means affect movement planning’ In half of all trials subjects respond to color (left, right, full, precision), instead of the posture Results are consistent with the hypothesized dominance of action goals in human behavior.

EEG motor resonance during observational learning of movement sequences Preliminary results suggest that: Individual differences in motor resonance predict number of errors in reproduction. Within subjects, observational learning is associated with changes in motor resonance. Results suggest a functional contribution of motor resonance to observational learning of arbitrary movement sequences. ‘What is the role of motor resonance in the learning of new action-sequences via observation? (Top) Subjects observe a sequence of six consecutive ipsi- and contralateral pointing movements of a virtual actor for reproduction (Bottom) Mu-power distribution in four subjects

Neural correlates of action observation and action planning Roger Newman-Norlund

Influence of Direction of Movement on Imitative and Complementary actions Preliminary results suggest that: –Direction of movement has no effect on initiation of Imitative actions. –Complementary actions are initiated faster when objects move towards actor. ‘How are complementary motor programs primed/activated?’

Preliminary results suggest that: –Sharing goal knowledge leads to increases in coupling, faster goal acquisition. –Sharing goal knowledge leads to worse performance in other parameters (i.e. bar drops) –Coupling evidences similar improvement independent of goal-knowledge manipulation. Influence of Goal Knowledge on Task Performance and Coupling of Behavior 12 GOAL ‘How does goal knowledge affect joint action?’ Lag (ms) % Recurrence Correlation (R 2 )

Inter- and intrapersonal co-ordination of body kinetics and kinematics Jurjen Bosga

Inter- and Intrapersonal Coordination in Joint Action on a Balancing Board How much predictive motor control in joint action is elicited by seeing the co-actor? Task Rock the board from side to side With imposed amplitude and frequency With and without seeing co-actor Balancing Board “Seeing each other” “Not seeing each other” Data Being collected

Error monitoring in competitive and cooperative contexts Ellen de Bruijn

Flexible adaptive behaviour in cooperation and competition ‘How does monitoring of own and observed errors modulate preferences?’ Preliminary results suggest that in competition: Participants efficiently adapt their behaviour following own errors and after other’s errors. These findings suggest a highly flexible adaptive motor system in joint action Investigations of adaptive behaviour in cooperative settings are currently ongoing.

Neural correlates of own and observed error processing in cooperation and competition Preliminary results suggest that in cooperation: Same areas (medial frontal cortex and insula) are involved in the detection of own and observed errors Whether activation in these areas is error- specific or reward-specific is currently being analyzed (cooperation vs. competition). ‘How does context modulate error- detection processes in joint action?’

Division of labour in WP2 Joint reasoning: action observation and action planning (Hein van Schie, Roger Newman-Norlund, Raymond Cuijpers) Joint attention: task dependent visual processing (Astros Chatziastros) Joint co-ordination: coordination of body kinetics and kinematics (Jurjen Bosga, Ruud Meulenbroek, Majken Hulstijn) Error monitoring and learning (Ellen de Bruijn) Sensory Proc. Sensory information Reasoning Motor output Motor Proc. Planning World knowledge, Personal prefs. Error monitoring