TY - JOUR

T1 - Functional Specificity and Sex Differences in the Neural Circuits Supporting the Inhibition of Automatic Imitation

AU - Darda, Kohinoor Monish

AU - Butler, Emily

AU - Ramsey, Richard

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - Although humans show an involuntary tendency to copy other people's actions, which builds rapport between individuals, we do not copy actions indiscriminately. Instead, copying behaviours are guided by a selection mechanism, which inhibits some actions and prioritises others. To date, the neural underpinnings of the inhibition of automatic imitation and differences between the sexes in imitation control are not well understood. Previous studies involved small sample sizes and low statistical power, which produced mixed findings regarding the involvement of domain-general and domain-specific neural architectures. Here, we used data from Experiment 1 (N=28) to perform a power analysis to determine the sample size required for Experiment 2 (N=50; 80% power). Using independent functional localisers and an analysis pipeline that bolsters sensitivity, during imitation control we show clear engagement of the multiple-demand network (domain-general), but no sensitivity in the theory-of-mind network (domain-specific). Weaker effects were observed with regard to sex differences, suggesting that there are more similarities than differences between the sexes in terms of the neural systems engaged during imitation control. In sum, neurocognitive models of imitation require revision to reflect that the inhibition of imitation relies to a greater extent on a domain-general selection system rather than a domain-specific system supporting social cognition.

AB - Although humans show an involuntary tendency to copy other people's actions, which builds rapport between individuals, we do not copy actions indiscriminately. Instead, copying behaviours are guided by a selection mechanism, which inhibits some actions and prioritises others. To date, the neural underpinnings of the inhibition of automatic imitation and differences between the sexes in imitation control are not well understood. Previous studies involved small sample sizes and low statistical power, which produced mixed findings regarding the involvement of domain-general and domain-specific neural architectures. Here, we used data from Experiment 1 (N=28) to perform a power analysis to determine the sample size required for Experiment 2 (N=50; 80% power). Using independent functional localisers and an analysis pipeline that bolsters sensitivity, during imitation control we show clear engagement of the multiple-demand network (domain-general), but no sensitivity in the theory-of-mind network (domain-specific). Weaker effects were observed with regard to sex differences, suggesting that there are more similarities than differences between the sexes in terms of the neural systems engaged during imitation control. In sum, neurocognitive models of imitation require revision to reflect that the inhibition of imitation relies to a greater extent on a domain-general selection system rather than a domain-specific system supporting social cognition.

U2 - 10.1162/jocn_a_01261

DO - 10.1162/jocn_a_01261

M3 - Article

VL - 30

SP - 914

EP - 933

JO - Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

JF - Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

SN - 0898-929X

IS - 6

ER -