Following Other People’s Footsteps: A Contextual-Attraction Effect Induced by Biological Motion

Abstract

Our visual system is bombarded with numerous social interactions that form intangible social bonds among people, as exemplified by synchronized walking in crowds. Here, we investigated whether these perceived social bonds implicitly intrude on visual perception and induce a contextual effect. Using multiple point-light walkers and a classical contextual paradigm, we tested 72 college-age adults across six experiments and found that the perceived direction of the central walker was attracted toward the direction of the surrounding walkers. The observed contextual-attraction effect occurred even when the surrounding walkers differed from the central walker in gender and walking speed but disappeared when they were asynchronously presented or replaced by inanimate motion. Strikingly, this contextual-attraction effect partially persisted in the context of local motion rather than static figures. These findings, in contrast to the typical contextual-repulsion effect, lend support for the distinctiveness of perceived social bonds on contextual modulation and suggest a specialized contextual mechanism tuned to social factors.

Keywords

biological motion walking direction collective motion contextual effect social bonds

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

Poggiali

Whitaker

Marshall

T. R.

Kievit

R. A.

(2019). Raincloud plots: A multi-platform tool for robust data visualization. Welcome Open Research, 4, 63–63. https://doi.org/10.12688/wellcomeopenres.15191.1

Aslaksen

E. W.

(2017). The social bond: How the interaction between individuals drives the evolution of society. Springer International Publishing AG.

Bar

(2004). Visual objects in context. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 5(8), 617–629. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn1476

Blakemore

Carpenter

R. H. S.

Georgeson

M. A.

(1970). Lateral inhibition between orientation detectors in the human visual system. Nature, 228(5266), 37–39. https://doi.org/10.1038/228037a0

Brainard

D. H.

(1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 433–436. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897X00357

Chen

Qiao

Wang

Jiang

(2018). Subconscious processing reveals dissociable contextual modulations of visual size perception. Cognition, 180, 259–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.07.014

Cheng

Liu

Yuan

Jiang

(2021). The eyes have it: Perception of social interaction unfolds through pupil dilation. Neuroscience Bulletin, 37(11), 1595–1598. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12264-021-00739-z

Clifford

C. W. G.

(2014). The tilt illusion: Phenomenology and functional implications. Vision Research, 104, 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2014.06.009

Cracco

Lee

van Belle

Quenon

Haggard

Rossion

Orgs

(2022). EEG frequency tagging reveals the integration of form and motion cues into the perception of group movement. Cerebral Cortex, 32(13), 2843–2857. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhab385

10.

Davenport

J. L.

Potter

M. C.

(2004). Scene consistency in object and background perception. Psychological Science, 15(8), 559–564. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2004.00719.x

11.

Davison

A. C.

Hinkley

D. V.

(1997). Bootstrap methods and their application. Cambridge University Press.

12.

Faul

Erdfelder

Buchner

Lang

A.-G.

(2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/brm.41.4.1149

13.

Harris

J. J.

Schwarzkopf

D. S.

Song

Bahrami

Rees

(2011). Contextual illusions reveal the limit of unconscious visual processing. Psychological Science, 22(3), 399–405. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797611399293

14.

Herbert-Read

J. E.

Perna

Mann

R. P.

Schaerf

T. M.

David

J. T. S.

Ashley

J. W. W.

(2011). Inferring the rules of interaction of shoaling fish. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 108(46), 18726–18731. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1109355108

15.

Hollingworth

Henderson

J. M.

(1998). Does consistent scene context facilitate object perception? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 127(4), 398–415. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.127.4.398

16.

Jackson

Blake

(2010). Neural integration of information specifying human structure from form, motion, and depth. The Journal of Neuroscience, 30(3), 838–848. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.3116-09.2010

17.

Kaiser

Quek

G. L.

Cichy

R. M.

Peelen

M. V.

(2019). Object vision in a structured world. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(8), 672–685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.04.013

18.

Krekelberg

(2021). bayesFactor: A Matlab package for Bayes factor statistical analysis. GitHub. https://www.github.com/klabhub/bayesFactor

19.

Lee

Launay

Stewart

(2020). Signals through music and dance: Perceived social bonds and formidability on collective movement. Acta Psychologica, 208, Article 103093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103093

20.

(1999). Contextual influences in V1 as a basis for pop out and asymmetry in visual search. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 96(18), 10530–10535. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.18.10530

21.

Liu

Yuan

Chen

Jiang

Zhou

(2018). Perception of social interaction compresses subjective duration in an oxytocin-dependent manner. eLife, 7, Article e32100. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.32100

22.

Mareschal

Colin

W. G. C.

(2012). Dynamics of unconscious contextual effects in orientation processing. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 109(19), 7553–7558. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1200952109

23.

Oliva

Torralba

(2007). The role of context in object recognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 11(12), 520–527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2007.09.009

24.

Pelli

D. G.

(1997). The VideoToolbox software for visual psychophysics: Transforming numbers into movies. Spatial Vision, 10(4), 437–442. https://doi.org/10.1163/156856897X00366

25.

Rennung

Göritz

A. S.

(2016). Prosocial consequences of interpersonal synchrony: A meta-analysis. Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 224(3), 168–189. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000252

26.

Schouten

Troje

N. F.

Verfaillie

(2010). The facing bias in biological motion perception: Structure, kinematics, and body parts. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 73(1), 130–143. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-010-0018-1

27.

Shamay-Tsoory

S. G.

Saporta

Marton-Alper

I. Z.

Gvirts

H. Z.

(2019). Herding brains: A core neural mechanism for social alignment. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(3), 174–186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.01.002

28.

Shultz

Dunbar

(2010). Bondedness and sociality. Behaviour, 147(7), 775–803. https://doi.org/10.1163/000579510X501151

29.

Strandburg-Peshkin

Farine

D. R.

Couzin

I. D.

Crofoot

M. C.

(2015). Shared decision-making drives collective movement in wild baboons. Science, 348(6241), 1358–1361. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaa5099

30.

Sweeny

T. D.

Haroz

Whitney

(2013). Perceiving group behavior: Sensitive ensemble coding mechanisms for biological motion of human crowds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(2), 329–337. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028712

31.

Thornton

I. M.

Vuong

Q. C.

(2004). Incidental processing of biological motion. Current Biology, 14(12), 1084–1089. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2004.06.025

32.

Troje

N. F.

(2002). Decomposing biological motion: A framework for analysis and synthesis of human gait patterns. Journal of Vision, 2(5), 371–387. https://doi.org/10.1167/2.5.2

33.

Troje

N. F.

Sadr

Geyer

Nakayama

(2006). Adaptation aftereffects in the perception of gender from biological motion. Journal of Vision, 6(8), 850–857. https://doi.org/10.1167/6.8.7

34.

Troje

N. F.

Westhoff

(2006). The inversion effect in biological motion perception: Evidence for a “life detector”? Current Biology, 16(8), 821–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.022

35.

Vallortigara

Regolin

(2006). Gravity bias in the interpretation of biological motion by inexperienced chicks. Current Biology, 16(8), R279–R280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.03.052

36.

Vallortigara

Regolin

Marconato

(2005). Visually inexperienced chicks exhibit spontaneous preference for biological motion patterns. PLOS Biology, 3(7), 1312–1316. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030208

37.

Vestner

Tipper

S. P.

Hartley

Over

Rueschemeyer

S. A.

(2019). Bound together: Social binding leads to faster processing, spatial distortion, and enhanced memory of interacting partners. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(7), 1251–1268. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000545

38.

Wagemans

Elder

J. H.

Kubovy

Palmer

S. E.

Peterson

M. A.

Singh

von der Heydt

(2012). A century of Gestalt psychology in visual perception: I. Perceptual grouping and figure-ground organization. Psychological Bulletin, 138(6), 1172–1217. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029333

39.

Wang

Jiang

(2012). Life motion signals lengthen perceived temporal duration. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109(11), E673–E677. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1115515109

40.

Wang

Yang

Shi

Jiang

(2014). The feet have it: Local biological motion cues trigger reflexive attentional orienting in the brain. NeuroImage, 84(1), 217–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.08.041

41.

Wang

Zhang

Jiang

(2010). Searching for life motion signals: Visual search asymmetry in local but not global biological-motion processing. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1083–1089. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797610376072

42.

Wang

Liu

Chen

Troje

N. F.

Jiang

(2018). Heritable aspects of biological motion perception and its covariation with autistic traits. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 115(8), 1937–1942. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714655115

43.

Warren

W. H.

(2018). Collective motion in human crowds. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(4), 232–240. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417746743

44.

Wilson

Gos

(2019). Perceiving social cohesion: Movement synchrony and task demands both matter. Perception, 48(4), 316–329. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006619837878

45.

Yuan

Zhang

Jiang

(2017). Dynamic tilt illusion induced by continuous contextual orientation alternations. Journal of Vision, 17(13), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1167/17.13.1

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.12 MB

0.19 MB

0.16 MB