Minimalist approach to perceptual interactions

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

Volumn , Issue MAY 2012, 2012, Pages

  Lenay, Charles ^a   Stewart, John ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TECHNOLOGIE DE COMPIÈGNE   (France)

Author keywords

Imitation; Interaction; Minimalism; Perceptual crossing; Recognition of intentionality

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; DYNAMICS; HUMAN; LEARNING; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); NONHUMAN; PERCEPTION; RECEPTIVE FIELD; RECOGNITION; SENSORY FEEDBACK; SENSORY STIMULATION; SOCIAL COGNITION; SOCIAL INTERACTION; TASK PERFORMANCE;

EID: 84933675305     PISSN: 16625161     EISSN: 16625161     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00098     Document Type: Article

References (101)

1. Argyle, M., and Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance and affiliation. Sociometry 289-304.
2. Auvray, M., Lenay, C., and Stewart, J. (2009). Perceptual interactions in a minimalist virtual environment. New Ideas Psychol. 27, 32-47.
3. Auvray, M., and Myin, E. (2009). Perception with compensatory devices: from sensory substitution to sensorimotor extension. Cogn. Sci. 33, 1036-1058.
4. Bach-y-Rita, P. (1990). Brain plasticity as a basis for recovery of function in humans. Neuropsychologia 28, 547-554.
5. Bach-y-Rita, P. (2004). Tactile sensory substitution studies. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1013, 83-91.
6. Bach-y-Rita, P., and Kercel, S. W. (2003). Sensory substitution and the human-machine interface. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 7, 541-546.
7. Baron-Cohen, S., and Cross, P. (1992). Reading the eyes: evidence for the role of perception in the development of a theory of mind. Mind Lang. 7, 172-186.
8. Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., Hill, J., Raste, Y., and Plumb, I. (2001). The "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" test revised version: a study with normal adults, and adults with Asperger syndrome or high-functioning autism. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 42, 241-251.
9. Berger, P. L., and Luckmann, T. (1966). The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. Garden City, NY:Anchor Books.
10. Blakemore, S. J., and Decety, J. (2001). From the perception of action to the understanding of intention. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2, 561-567.
11. Brass, M., and Heyes, C. (2005). Imitation: is cognitive neuroscience solving the correspondence problem? Trends Cogn. Sci. 9, 489-495.
12. Brooks, R. A. (1991). Intelligence without representation. Artif. Intell. 47, 139-159.
13. Butterworth, G. (1999). "Neonatal imitation: existence, mechanisms and motives," in Imitation in Infancy. Cambridge Studies in Cognitive Perceptual Development, eds D. J. Nadel and G. Butterworth (New York: Cambridge University Press), 63-88.
14. Butterworth, G., and Jarrett, N. (1991). What minds have in common is space: spatial mechanisms serving joint visual attention in infancy. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 9, 55-72.
15. Catmur, C., Walsh, V., and Heyes, C. (2007). Sensorimotor learning configures the human mirror system. Curr. Biol. 17, 1527-1531.
16. Catmur, C., Walsh, V., and Heyes, C. (2009). Associative sequence learning: the role of experience in the development of imitation and the mirror system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 364, 2369.
17. Clark, A., and Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis 58, 7-19.
18. Coleman, P., and Watson, A. (2000). Infant attachment as a dynamic system. Hum. Dev. 43, 295-313.
19. Collins, C. C., and Bach-y-Rita, P. (1973). Transmission of pictorial information through the skin. Adv. Biol. Med. Phys. 14, 285.
20. Cook, R., Press, C., Dickinson, A., and Heyes, C. (2010). Acquisition of automatic imitation is sensitive to sensorimotor contingency. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 36, 840.
21. Csibra, G., Biro, S., Koós, O., and Gergely, G. (2003). One-year-old infants use teleological representations of actions productively. Cogn. Sci. 27, 111-133.
22. de Jaegher, H., and di Paolo, E. (2007). Participatory sense-making. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 6, 485-507.
23. de Jaegher, H., di Paolo, E., and Gallagher, S. (2010). Can social interaction constitute social cognition? Trends Cogn. Sci., 14, 441-447.
24. de Volder, A. G., Catalan-Ahumada, M., Robert, A., Bol, A., Labar, D., Cop-pens, A., Michel, C., and Veraart, C. (1999). Changes in occipital cortex activity in early blind humans using a sensory substitution device. Brain Res. 826, 128-134.
25. Dennett, D. C. (1971). Intentional systems. J. Philos. 68, 87-106.
26. Deschamps, L., Le Bihan, G., Lenay, C., Rovira, K., Stewart, J., and Aubert, D. (2012). "Interpersonal recognition through mediated tactile interaction," Proceedings of IEEE Hap-tics Symposium 2012, March 4-7, Vancouver, 239-245.
27. Di Paolo, E. A., and Iizuka, H. (2008). How (not) to model autonomous behaviour. Biosystems 91, 409-423.
28. Di Paolo, E. A., Rohde, M., and Iizuka, H. (2008). Sensitivity to social contingency or stability of interaction? Modelling the dynamics of perceptual crossing. New Ideas Psychol. 26, 278-294.
29. Dumas, G. (2011). Towards a two-body neuroscience. Commun. Integr. Biol. 4, 349.
30. Farroni, T., Csibra, G., Simion, F., and Johnson, M. H. (2002). Eye contact detection in humans from birth. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A 99, 9602.
31. Ferrari, P. F., Rozzi, S., and Fogassi, L. (2005). Mirror neurons responding to observation of actions made with tools in monkey ventral pre-motor cortex. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 17, 212-226.
32. Fogel, A. (2006). Dynamic systems research on interindividual communication: the transformation of meaning-making. J. Dev. Process. 1, 7-30.
33. Froese, T., and di Paolo, E. (2008). "Stability of coordination requires mutuality of interaction in a model of embodied agents," in From Ani-mats to Animals 10, The Tenth International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, Osaka, 52-61.
34. Froese, T., and di Paolo, E. (2011a). The enactive approach: theoretical sketches from cell to society. Prag-mat. Cogn. 19, 1-36.
35. Froese, T., and di Paolo, E. (2011b). Toward minimally social behavior: social psychology meets evolutionary robotics. Lecture notes in computer science: Advances in Artificial Life. Darwin Meets von Neumann, 5777, 426-433.
36. Froese, T., and Di Paolo, E. A. (2010). Modelling social interaction as perceptual crossing: an investigation into the dynamics of the interaction process. Conn. Sci. 22, 43-68.
37. Galantucci, B., and Sebanz, N. (2009). Joint action: current perspectives. Top. Cogn. Sci. 1, 255-259.
38. Gallagher, S. (2001). The practice of mind. Theory, simulation or primary interaction? J. Conscious. Stud. 8, 5, 83-108.
39. Gallese, V. (2007). Before and below 'theory of mind': embodied simulation and the neural correlates of social cognition. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 362, 659-669.
40. Gallese, V., Keysers, C., and Rizzolatti, G. (2004). A unifying view of the basis of social cognition. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 8, 396-403.
41. Gapenne, O., Rovira, K., Lenay, C., Stewart, J., and Auvray, M. (2005). "Is form perception necessary tied to specific sensory feedback," in 13th International Conference on Perception and Action (ICPA), Monterey, CA, 16.
42. Gergely, G., Nádasdy, Z., Csibra, G., and Bíró, S. (1995). Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age. Cognition 56, 165-193.
43. Gibson, J. J. (1986). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
44. Gillespie, A. (2005). GH Mead: theorist of the social act. J. Theory Soc. Behav. 35, 19-39.
45. Goffman, E., and Best, J. (2005). Interaction Ritual: Essays in Face-to-Face Behavior. Chicago: Aldine Transaction.
46. Guarniero, G. (1974). Experience of tactile vision. Perception 3, 101-104.
47. Heider, F. (1982). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48. Heyes, C. (2001). Causes and consequences of imitation. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 5, 253-261.
49. Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the Wild, Vol. 19. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
50. Iacoboni, M., Woods, R. P., Brass, M., Bekkering, H., Mazziotta, J. C., and Rizzolatti, G. (1999). Cortical mechanisms of human imitation. Science 286, 2526.
51. Itier, R. J., and Batty, M. (2009). Neural bases of eye and gaze processing: the core of social cognition. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 33, 843-863.
52. Knoblich, G., Butterfill, S., and Sebanz, N. (2011). Psychological research on joint action: theory and data. Psy-chol. Learn. Motiv. 54, 59-101.
53. Lavelli, M., and Fogel, A. (2005). Developmental changes in the relationship between the infant's attention and emotion during early face-to-face communication: the 2-month transition. Dev. Psychol. 41, 265.
54. Lenay, C., Auvray, M., Sebbah, F. D., and Stewart, J. (2006). "Perception of an intentional subject: an enac-tive approach," in Third International Conference on Enactive Interface, Montpellier, 37-38.
55. Lenay, C., Canu, S., and Villon, P. (1997). "Technology and perception: the contribution of sensory substitution systems," in International Conference on Cognitive Technology (Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society), 44.
56. Lenay, C., Gapenne, O., Hanneton, S., Marque, C., and Genouëlle, C. (2003). "Sensory substitution: limits and perspectives," in Touching for Knowing, Cognitive Psychology of Haptic Manual Perception, eds D. Y. Hatwell, A. Streri, and E. Gentaz (Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company), 275-292.
57. Lenay, C., and Steiner, P. (2010). Beyond the internalism/externalism debate: the constitution of the space of perception. Conscious. Cogn. 19, 938-952.
58. Lenay, C., Stewart, J., Rohde, M., and Ali Ammar, A. (2011). "You never fail to surprise me": the hallmark of the other. Experimental study and simulations of perceptual crossing. Interact. Stud. 3, 373-396.
59. Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation: the origins of "theory of mind." Psychol. Rev. 94, 412.
60. Levinas, E. (1979). Totality and Infinity: An Essay on Exteriority, Vol. 1. Berlin: Springer.
61. Maillet, B., Lenay, C., and Guenand, A. (2008). "Designing for interpersonal tactile interaction over distance." in User Experience of ICTs - Proceedings of the 21st International Symposium on Human Factors in Telecommunications, March 17-20, Kuala Lumpur, 391-398.
62. Marsh, K. L., Richardson, M. J., and Schmidt, R. (2009). Social connection through joint action and interpersonal coordination. Top. Cogn. Sci. 1, 320-339.
63. McGann, M., and De Jaegher, H. (2009). Self-other contingencies: enacting social perception. Phenom-enol. Cogn. Sci. 8, 417-437.
64. Meltzoff, A. N. (1995). Understanding the intentions of others: re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Dev. Psychol. 31, 838.
65. Meltzoff, A. N., and Moore, M. K. (1997). Explaining facial imitation: a theoretical model. Early Dev. Parent. 6, 179-192.
66. Meltzoff, A. N., and Moore, M. K. (1999). "Persons and representation: why infant imitation is important for theories of human development," in Imitation in Infancy. Cambridge Studies in Cognitive Perceptual Development, eds D. J. Nadel and G. Butterworth (New York: Cambridge University Press), 9-35.
67. Merleau-Ponty, M. (1996). Phenomenology of Perception. New Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass Publisher.
68. Michael, J., and Overgaard, S. (2012). Interaction and social cognition: a comment on Auvray et al.'s perceptual crossing paradigm. New Ideas Psychol. 30, 296-299.
69. Nagy, E. (2006). From imitation to conversation: the first dialogues with human neonates. Infant Child Dev. 15, 223-232.
70. Newcomb, T. M., Converse, P. E., and Turner, R. H. (1966). Social Psychology: The Study of Human Interaction. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
71. O'Regan, J. K., and Noë, A. (2001). A sensorimotor account of vision and visual consciousness. Behav. Brain Sci. 24, 939-972.
72. Petras, J. W.(1968). John Dewey and the rise of interactionism in American social theory. J. Hist. Behav. Sci. 4, 18-27.
73. Povinelli, D. J., Reaux, J. E., Theall, L. A., and Giambrone, S. (2000). Folk Physics for Apes: The Chimpanzee's Theory of How the World Works. New York: Oxford University Press.
74. Premack, D. (1990). The infant's theory of self-propelled objects. Cognition 36, 1-16.
75. Ray, E., and Heyes, C. (2011). Imitation in infancy: the wealth of the stimulus. Dev. Sci. 14, 92-105.
76. Reddy, V. (2003). On being the object of attention: implications for self-other consciousness. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 7, 397-402.
77. Reddy, V. (2008). How Infants Know Minds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
78. Rizzolatti, G., and Arbib, M. A. (1998). Language within our grasp. Trends Neurosci. 21, 188-194.
79. Rizzolatti, G., and Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 27, 169-192.
80. Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., and Gallese, V. (2002). "From mirror neurons to imitation: facts and speculations," in The Imitative Mind: Development, Evolution, and Brain Bases, Vol. 6, eds A. N. Meltzoff and W. Prinz (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), 247-265.
81. Rohde, M., and Di Paolo, E. (2008). "Embodiment and perceptual crossing in 2D: a comparative evolutionary robotics study," in From Animates to Animals 10, The Tenth International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior, eds M. Asada, J. Hallam, J.-A. Meyer, and J. Tani (Berlin: Springer), 83-92.
82. Schiff, W., and Foulke, E. (1982). Tactual Perception: A Sourcebook. New York: Cambridge University Press.
83. Schilbach, L., Wohlschlaeger, A. M., Kraemer, N. C., Newen, A., Shah, N. J., Fink, G. R., and Voge-ley, K. (2006). Being with virtual others: neural correlates of social interaction. Neuropsychologia 44, 718-730.
84. Schmidt, R., and Richardson, M. (2008). "Dynamics of interpersonal coordination," in Coordination: Neural, Behavioral and Social Dynamics, eds A. Fuchs and V. Jirsa (Heidelberg: Springer), 281-308.
85. Schütz, A. (1970). Alfred Schutz on Phenomenology and Social Relations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
86. Sebanz, N., Bekkering, H., and Knoblich, G. (2006). Joint action: bodies and minds moving together. Trends Cogn. Sci. (Regul. Ed.) 10, 70-76.
87. Sribunruangrit, N., Marque, C. K., Lenay, C., Hanneton, S., Gapenne, O., and Vanhoutte, C. (2004). Speed-accuracy tradeoff during performance of a tracking task without visual feedback. IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng. 12, 131-139.
88. Steiner, P., and Stewart, J. (2009). From autonomy to heteronomy (and back): the enaction of social life. Phenomenol. Cogn. Sci. 8, 527-550.
89. Stewart, J., and Gapenne, O. (2004). Reciprocal modelling of active perception of 2-D forms in a simple tactile-vision substitution system. Minds Mach. 14, 309-330.
90. Thomas, R., Press, C., and Haggard, P. (2006). Shared representations in body perception. Acta Psychol. (Amst) 121, 317-330.
91. Thompson, E. (2007). Mind in Life: Biology, Phenomenology, and the Sciences of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
92. Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., Moll, H., and others. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: the origins of cultural cognition. Behav. Brain Sci. 28, 675-690.
93. Tremoulet, P. D., and Feldman, J.(2000). Perception of animacy from the motion of a single object. Perception 29, 943-952.
94. Trevarthen, C. (1993). "The self born in intersubjectivity: the psychology of an infant communicating," in The Perceived Self: Ecological and Interpersonal Sources of Self-knowledge, ed. U. Neisser (New York: Cambridge University Press), 121-173.
95. Trevarthen, C., and Reddy, V. (2007). Consciousness in infants. The Black-well Companion to Consciousness, eds M. Velmans and S. Schneider (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing), 37-57.
96. van Dijk, J., Kerkhofs, R., van Rooij, I., and Haselager, P. (2008). Can there be such a thing as embodied embedded cognitive neuroscience? Theory Psychol. 18, 297-316.
97. Varela, F. J. (1979). Principles of Biological Autonomy. New York: North Holland.
98. Varela, F. J., Thompson, E., and Rosch, E. (1999). The Embodied Mind: Cognitive Science and Human Experience. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
99. Visell, Y. (2009). Tactile sensory substitution: models for enaction in HCI. Interact. Comput. 21, 38-53.
100. Ward, J., and Meijer, P. (2010). Visual experiences in the blind induced by an auditory sensory substitution device. Conscious. Cogn. 19, 492-500.
101. Wilkerson, W. S. (1999). From bodily motions to bodily intentions: the perception of bodily activity. Philos. Psychol. 12, 61-77.