Kai Vogeley
Neuroimaging GroupDepartment of Psychiatry
University Hospital Cologne
Social Cognition GroupInstitute for
Neurosciences and MedicineResearch Center Juelich
Social Consciousness
Person Perception and Object Perception
Heider 1958
“Person Perception“
“social Perception“
(Heider 1958)
Inherent Ambiguosity,
Intentionality
Probabilistic Prcoessing
„Object Perception“
„non-social Perception“
(Heider 1958)
Causality
Deterministic Processing
Social Cognition
Cognitive processes focusing in differentiation and exchange of mental
phenomena for the purpose of communication and interaction with others
(self-other-differentiation, self-other-exchange)
Social Consciousness
Self-Other-
Differentiation
(Self Ascription)
Universality for
Homo Sapiens
Intuitive,Prereflexive Level
Inferential,
Reflexive, Level
Reference
Culture
Levels
Variability
across Cultures
Self-Other-
Exchange
(Ascription to Others)
Vogeley & Roepstorff 2009
Ego-Psychopathology
Daseinsbewußtsein
Vollzugsbewußtsein
Einheit des Ich
Identität des Ich
Ich-Bewußtsein im
Gegensatz zu Außen
(Jaspers 1913)
Ego-Vitality
Ego-Activity
Ego-Consistency
Ego-Identity
Ego-Demarcation
(Scharfetter 1985, 1996, 1998)
DelusionalMood
ComplexDelusional System
Delusion
Increased Disposition to
Ascribe to Others
(Conrad 1958)
Hypermentalising (Frith 2004)
Reduced Ability to Take
Other Persons Perspectives
(Blankenburg 1978)
Disturbances of Interaction and
Communication
Reduced Capacity to Ascribe to Others
Hypomentalising
(Frith 2004)
Universality of Psychopathology
Variability of Psychopathology
Social Cognition and Psychopathology
Social Consciousness
Systematic, Parametric Variation of Animacy Experience
Level 1Contact
Response
“Personal“ Stimulus“Physical“ Stimulus
Santos et al. 2008, 2010
Level 2Contact
Response
Level 3Contact
Response
Level 4Contact
Response
Social Consciousness
“Personal“ Stimuli (Stimulus Parameter)
“physical“
“more physical
than personal“
“more personal
than physical“
“personal“
1 2 3 4
Santos et al. 2008, 2010
Controls
Error Bars:
Standard Deviation
Systematic, Parametric Variation of Animacy Experience
Level 1Contact
Response
Level 2Contact
Response
Level 3Contact
Response
Level 4Contact
Response
Social Consciousness
“Personal“ Stimuli (Stimulus Parameter)
1 2 3 4
Santos et al. 2008, 2010
Systematic, Parametric Variation of Animacy Experience
Level 1Contact
Response
Level 2Contact
Response
Level 3Contact
Response
Level 4Contact
Response
R
R L
L1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
Amygdala Insula
Gyrus
fusiformisContrastEstimates
ContrastEstimates
Contrast
Estimates
Contrast
EstimatesMedialer
PFC
6 66 7
28 -2 -19 28 -2 -19
-28 -50 -11
Social Consciousness
Mixed two-way repeated measures ANOVAsign. MainEffect “Stimulus“ (F(3, 66)=61.6, p<.001)
HFAControls
“physical“
“more physical
than personal“
“more personal
than physical“
“personal“
Error Bars:
Standard Deviation
Loss of Differential Brain Activation in Autism
Santos et al. 2008, 2010; Kuzmanovic et al., in preparation
Level 1Contact
Response
Level 2Contact
Response
Level 3Contact
Response
Level 4Contact
Response
Induction Perception Fit
HFA: M = .59, SD = .24
Controls: M = .67, SD = .18
Difference: t(24) = .98, p = .335
Social Consciousness
Loss of Differential Brain Activation in Autism
Santos et al. 2008, 2010; Kuzmanovic et al., in preparation
Level 1Contact
Response
Level 2Contact
Response
Level 3Contact
Response
Level 4Contact
Response
1 2 3
R
R L
L
ContrastEstimates
6 -68 45
54 -44 51
Medial
PFC
4
1 2 3 4
Contrast
EstimatesInsula
anterior
HFA
Controls
HFA
Controls
1 2 3 4
Contrast
Estimates
Insula
posterior
Dorsomedial
PFCHFA
Controls
Contrast
Estimates
1 2 3 4
HFA
Controls
“Personal“ Stimuli (Stimulus Parameter; Control Persons > HFA)
Social Consciousness
Verbal Information (Positive Valence)
Sie hörte ihren Kolleginnen stets aufmerksam zu.Sie erzählte die Geheimnisse ihrer Kollegin nicht weiter.
…
Verbal Information (Negative Valence)
Sie hörte ihren Kolleginnen oft nicht aufmerksam zu.Sie erzählte die Geheimnisse ihrer Kollegin anderen weiter.
…
Competition of Inferential and Intuitive Processes
Kuzmanovic et al. 2010
Social Consciousness
Non-Verbal Information (Positive Valence) Non-Verbal Information (Negative Valence)
Competition of Inferential and Intuitive Processes
Kuzmanovic et al. 2010; Kuzmanovic et al., in Revision
Social Consciousness
Inferential (Verbal) Intuitive (Nonverbal)
Explicit Semantic InformationControlled Dispositional Inference
Verbal Presentation
Implicit InformationAutomatic Identification of BehaviourNonverbale Presentation
„superficial judgment“(Faces)Freeman et al. 2010
„individuated judgment“(Specific Verbal Information)
Freeman et al. 2010
Emotional ProcessingZald 2003; Sergerie et al. 2008; Said et al. 2009
Retrieval Episodic MemoryMaddock 1999; Maddock et al. 2001
Competition of Inferential and Intuitive Processes
Kuzmanovic et al., in Revision
verbal nonverbal
Contrast
Estimates
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Gyrus cinguli posterior
-14 -56 32
verbal nonverbal
0 1 2 3
0 1 2 3
-22 -6 -16
Contrast
Estimates Amygdala
Social Consciousness
RatingHFA
ControlsHFA
ControlsHFA
Controls
Kuzmanovic et al. 2010
Main Effect Valence(p < 0.001, r = 0.98)
Main Effect Valence (p < 0.001, r = 0.97)Interaction Valence x Modality (p < 0.001, r = 0.71)
Main Effect Modality(p < 0.001, r = 0.67)
Main Effect Valence
(p = 0.001, r = 0.58)
Interaction Group x Modality(p < 0.05, r = 0.39)
Main Effect Combination(p < 0.001, r = 0.77)
Interaction Group x Combination
(p < 0.05, r = 0.43)
Competition of Inferential and Intuitive Processes
Relative Influence (Example)Simple Impression Formation Complex Impression Formation
Error Bars: 95% Confidence Intervalof Mean Value
congruent incongruent
Social Consciousness
Joint Attention
Schilbach et al. 2010; Wilms et al. 2010
Social Consciousness
Schilbach et al. 2010; Wilms et al. 2010
Joint Attention
Social Consciousness
Schilbach et al. 2010; Wilms et al. 2010
Einzelkontrast
Self Joint vs. Self Non-Joint
Einzelkontrast
Other Joint vs.
Other Non-Joint
Joint Attention
Social Consciousness
Pfeiffer et al., in revision
Social Turing Test
Social Consciousness
Non-joint attention
Non-joint attention
Non-joint attention
1) Initiation phase2) Participant choses objectJoint attention
1) Initiation phase2) Participant choses objectJoint attention
Non-joint attention
“Was the virtual character controlledby another person (“1“) or
by the computer (“0“)?
Social Turing Test
Pfeiffer et al., in revision
Social Consciousness
Naive confederate: Avatar Version
0
0,5
1
Zero One Two Three Four Five Six
Times gaze following out of six
Ra
tin
g o
f h
um
an
ne
ss
Naïve ConditionThe confederate is introduced as partner who is naïve for the task of the participant. n = 22
Contingency: F = 3,61; p < 0,05
Linear Trend: F = 10,5; p < 0,01
Competitive confederate
0
0,5
1
Zero One Two Three Four Five Six
Times gaze following out of six
Ra
tin
g o
f h
um
an
ne
ss
Cooperative confederate
0
0,5
1
Zero One Two Three Four Five Six
Times gaze following out of six
Ra
tin
g o
f h
um
an
ne
ss
Competitive ConditionThe Confederate is Introduced as Competitive and Is Asked to make it as difficult as possible for the participant to pass the task.
Cooperative ConditionThe confederate is introduced as cooperative and is asked to make it as easy as possiblefor the participant to pass the task
n = 14
Contingency: n.s.
Trends: n.s.
n = 26
Contingency: F = 22,23; p < 0,001
Linear Trend: F = 21,25; p < 0,001
QuadraticTrend: F = 37,91; p < 0,001
Cubic Trend: F = 9,6; p < 0,01
Valence
Contingency
Social Turing Test
Pfeiffer et al., in revision
Social Consciousness
Raichle et al. 2001; Buckner et al. 2008; Schilbach et al. 2008; Vogeley 2010
Mental ContentDecrease of spontaneous thoughts
unrelated to the external world
Attention to the External WorldFocused attention
Mental ContentIncrease of spontaneous thoughts
unrelated to the external world
Attention to the External WorldDiffuse attention
Default Mode of Brain Function
Social Consciousness
Schilbach et al. 2008, in preparation; Vogeley 2010
Deactivation(553 Studies)
Meta-Analysis
Theory of Mind(75 Studies)
Activation Likelihood Estimation(ALE)
Meta-Analytic Connectivity Modelling(MACM)
Laird et al., J Neurosci 2009Eickhoff et al., J Neurosci 2010
Social Consciousness
Schilbach et al. 2008, in preparation; Vogeley 2010
Deactivation(553 Studies)
Meta-Analysis
Theory of Mind(75 Studies)
Deactivation ANDTheory of Mind
Social Consciousness
Short Term Scientific Mission (STSM): COST-STSM-BM0605-5500
Exploring the putative relationship of self-consciousness, social cognition and the ‘default mode of brain function’ in high-functioning autism by means of
constrained connectivity ICA graphs of resting state fMRI data
Hosts: Athena Demertzi & Andrea Soddu, Liège, Belgium
Guest: Leonhard Schilbach, Cologne, Germany
Default Mode of Brain in Function in HFA
Social Consciousness
Future Projects
Timmermans, B., Cleeremans, A., Vogeley, K: Do people with autism really make information more explicit? (in preparation)
Timmermans B, Pfeiffer U, Haider H, Bente G, Cleeremans A, Vogeley K: Joint sequence learning as a measure of
automatic action representation. (in preparation)
Social Consciousness
Implicit versus Explicit Learning in HFA
Implicit learning is intact in autism (e.g. Brown et al., 2010)
Earlier studies reported IL deficits due to combination of learning being explicit + lower IQ
(IQ influences explicit, but not implicit learning)Therefore, studies showing intact IL aim for totally implicit learning (e.g. no deterministic, but
probabilistic sequence learning)
Occasional reports on people with autism being able to memorise sequences explicitly are correlated
with high IQ
Question : irrespective of their IL capacity, is there anything that makes people with autism, if matched for IQ, able to spontaneously render information more explicit?
Measuring Joint Path Goals: Joint Implicit Sequence Learning
Joint action exists in 2 varieties: (a) final goal joint action, where both agents contribute with their
actions toward a joint task goal, and (b) path goal joint action, where both agents continuously have to incorporate the other's action in their own action planning (e.g.,
dancing).
Question: how can we develop a measure for joint path goals, i.e., ongoing representation and incorporation of the other person's actions in one's own?
Dr. med. Fritz Lehnhardt
Schwester Marita
Dipl.-Psych. Katharina KrämerMathis Jording, SHK
Dr. med. Leo Schilbach
Dipl.-Psych. Denis Engemann
Dipl.-Psych. Bojana Kuzmanovic
Dipl.-Psych. Kathleen VolpertDr. rer. nat. Ralf Tepest
Anja Kassecker, SHK
Dipl.-Psych. Alexandra Georgescu
Dr. Bert Timmermans
Ulrich Pfeiffer, M. Sc.
Theresa Schoofs, SHK
Dipl.-Psych. Astrid Gawronski
Thanks to
Cologne Group
Top Related