[Eeglablist] Joint ICA in social interaction paradigm
marco.congedo at gmail.com
Tue Jan 31 01:44:48 PST 2012
we are also working in this field.
The relevant decomposition approach for dual and multi-subject studies in
is the joint BSS, to exploit not only classical within-subect source
decorrelation, but also the correlation of sources among subjects
If you make a search for "joint blind source separation" articles you will
find a few.
Congedo M, Phlypo R, Pham D-T (2011)
Approximate Joint Singular Value Decomposition of an Asymmetric Rectangular
*IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing* 59(1), 415-424.
for the particular case N=2.
We are currently in the process of publishing two new algorithms for
performing JBSS.for any number of subjects.
If you are interested please let me know.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (cnrs) and Grenoble University.
Team ViBS (Vision and Brain Signal Processing)
GIPSA-lab (Grenoble Images Parole Signal Automatique)
11 rue des Mathématiques
Domaine universitaire - BP 46 -
38402, Grenoble, France.
tel: +33 (0)4 76 82 62 52
fax: +33 (0)4 76 57 47 90
On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 2:29 AM, Tarik S Bel-Bahar
<tarikbelbahar at gmail.com>wrote:
> Hello Naeem,
> Some quick thoughts...
> These are very early days indeed for two-or more brain studies,
> especially using EEG, although various groups are making inroads,
> see recent work Dumas, from Tognoni, and from Babiloni's groups,
> among others, all of which use diverse methods with EEG.
> If you are using ICA, why not decompose
> each person's data separately, without PCA,
> and then analyze correlations
> between similar ICs across the
> two individuals, across particular
> conditions. "Similar" ICs may be
> determined via eeglab's study clustering function (which uses PCA)
> or with the CORRMAP plugin.
> Calhoun et al.'s EEGIFT with group-ICA
> certainly looks like an interesting
> option (attached).
> Overall, the field is wide open for suggestions,
> so if you come across some new solutions,
> *please let the list know!*
> An important point is whether
> you use measures external to EEG
> to assess some behavioral metric coordination.
> Overall the issue is what you are hunting for.
> See also Hasson and others' forays into
> cross-correlation across brains.
> I've included some brain based citation below which might be of use to you,
> as well as some non-brain literature that bears directly on two-person or
> more studies. good luck
> *Anders et al., (2011). Flow of affective information between
> communicating brains. NeuroImage 54, 439–446.*
> Astolfi L, Toppi J, De Vico Fallani F, Vecchiato G, Salinari S, Mattia D,
> Cincotti F, Babiloni F. (2010). Neuroelectrical Hyperscanning Measures
> Simultaneous Brain Activity in Humans. Brain Topography, 23 (3), 243-256<http://www.springerlink.com/content/m7t53m267n3m5286/>,
> Dumas G, Nadel J, Soussignan R, Martinerie J, Garnero L (2010)
> Inter-Brain Synchronization during Social Interaction. PLoS ONE 5(8):
> *Schilbach* L, Wilms M, Eickhoff SB, Romanzetti S, Tepest R, Bente G,
> Shah NJ, Fink GR, Vogeley K (2009) *Minds Made for Sharing*: *Initiating
> Joint Attention Recruits Reward*-*related Neurocircuitry*. Journal of
> Cognitive Neuroscience 0:*1-14*.
> Schippers MB, Roebroeck A, Renken R, Nanetti L, Keysers C. (2010).
> "Mapping the Information flow from one brain to another during gestural
> communication". Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 May 18;107(20):9388-93.
> Stephens, J. G., Silbert, J. L. & Hasson, U. (2010). Speaker–listener
> neural coupling underlies successful communication. PNAS, July 27.
> Tognoli, E., J. Lagarde, et al. (2007). "The phi complex as a neuromarker
> of human social coordination." Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104(19): 8190-5.
> Carletta, J., Hill, R. L., Nicol, C., Taylor, T., de Ruiter, J. P., &
> Bard, E. G. (2010). Eye tracking for two-person tasks with manipulation of
> a virtual world. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 254-265.
> Wilms M, Schilbach L, Pfeiffer U, Bente G, Fink GR, Vogeley K: (2010).
> It´s in your eyes. Using gaze-contingent stimuli to create truly
> interactive paradigms for social cognitive and affective neuroscience.
> Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 5, 98-107
> Kelso J.A.S, de Guzman G.C., Reveley C., Tognoli E. (2009) Virtual Partner
> Interaction (VPI): Exploring Novel Behaviors via Coordination Dynamics.
> PLoS ONE 4(6) e5749.
> *Keysers C, Kaas J, Gazzola V. (2010). "Somatosensation in Social
> Perception." Nature Reviews Neuroscience. 2010 Jun;11(6):417-28. *
> Knoblich, G., Butterfill, S., & Sebanz, N. (2011). Psychological research
> on joint action: theory and data . In B. Ross (Ed.),The Psychology of
> Learning and Motivation, 54 (pp. 59-101), Burlington: Academic Press.
> Kokal I, Keysers C. Granger causality mapping during joint actions reveals
> evidence for forward models that could overcome sensory-motor delays. PLoS
> One. 2010 Oct 21;5(10):e13507.
> Marsh, K. L., Johnston, L., Richardson, M. J., & Schmidt, R. C. (2009).
> Hop off the mirror neuron bandwagon and join ours, it’s less crowded!
> European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 1234-1235.
> Oullier, O., G. C. de Guzman, et al. (2007). "Social coordination
> dynamics: Measuring human bonding." Social Neuroscience 99999(1): 1 – 15.
> Perry, A., Stein, L., & Bentin, S. (2011). Motor and attentional
> mechanisms involved in social interaction: Evidence from mu and alpha EEG
> suppression. Neuroimage, 58, 895-904. DOI
> Richardson, M. J., K. L. Marsh, et al. (2007). "Rocking together: dynamics
> of intentional and unintentional interpersonal coordination." Hum Mov Sci
> (6): 867-91.
> Richardson, M. J., Marsh, K. L., & Schmidt, R. C. (2010). Challenging the
> egocentric view of perceiving, acting, and knowing. In L. Feldman Barrett,
> B. Mesquita, & E. Smith (Eds), The mind in context (pp. 307-333). New York:
> Guilford Press.
> Richardson, M. J., Marsh, K. L., Isenhower, R., Goodman, J., & Schmidt, R.
> C. (2007). Rocking together: Dynamics of intentional and unintentional
> interpersonal coordination. Human Movement Science, 26, 867-891.
> Richardson, MJ., van der Wel, R.P.R.D., Knoblich, G., & Sebanz, N. (in
> press). Let the force be with us: Dyads exploit haptic coupling for
> coordination . Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 5:31 AM, muhammad naeem <naeem6500 at yahoo.com>wrote:
>> Hi EEGlablist,
>> In an EEG paradigm concerning two-person social interaction I am trying a
>> joint ICA approach (e.g: Calhoun and colleagues-NeuroImage 45 (2009)
>> S163–S172 and computational Intelligence and Neuroscience
>> doi:10.1155/2011/129365 ). A similar approach has been used in other
>> studies (e.g Montague and colleagues- NeuroImage 16, 1159–1164
>> (2002)doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1150). Essential difference between two is the
>> arrangement of Data. In the first, virtual channels have been created
>> (separate sphering process and PCA ) whereas in the second data of two
>> subjects were concatenated giving lesser (half ) IC's to investigate. I am
>> wondering which approach is more appropriate and why?
>> A subsequent question is regarding data reduction- PCA is usually used
>> but as mentioned in the first references may not be suitable for the
>> activities which are not time/phase-locked(as the case with my data). What
>> are the other options?
>> Looking forward to your insight.
>> Best regards,
>> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
>> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
>> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
>> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
>> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu
> Eeglablist page: http://sccn.ucsd.edu/eeglab/eeglabmail.html
> To unsubscribe, send an empty email to
> eeglablist-unsubscribe at sccn.ucsd.edu
> For digest mode, send an email with the subject "set digest mime" to
> eeglablist-request at sccn.ucsd.edu
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the eeglablist