| Literature DB >> 30002482 |
Joanne L Edgar1, Christine J Nicol2.
Abstract
Emotional contagion - an underpinning valenced feature of empathy - is made up of simpler, potentially dissociable social processes which can include socially-mediated arousal and behavioural/physiological contagion. Previous studies of emotional contagion have often conflated these processes rather than examining their independent contribution to empathic response. We measured socially-mediated arousal and contagion in 9-week old domestic chicks (n = 19 broods), who were unrelated but raised together from hatching. Pairs of observer chicks were exposed to two conditions in a counterbalanced order: air puff to conspecifics (AP) (during which an air puff was applied to three conspecifics at 30 s intervals) and control with noise of air puff (C) (during which the air puff was directed away from the apparatus at 30 s intervals). Behaviour and surface eye temperature of subjects and observers were measured throughout a 10-min pre-treatment and 10-min treatment period. Subjects and observers responded to AP with increased freezing, and reduced preening and ground pecking. Subjects and observers also showed reduced surface eye temperature - indicative of stress-induced hyperthermia. Subject-Observer behaviour was highly correlated within broods during both C and AP conditions, but with higher overall synchrony during AP. We demonstrate the co-occurrence of socially-mediated behavioural and physiological arousal and contagion; component features of emotional contagion.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30002482 PMCID: PMC6043517 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-018-28923-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Eye temperature response of Subjects and Observers to Control (C) and Air puff (AP) during the pre-treatment (Pre) and treatment (Treat) periods.
Figure 2Correlations between Subjects’ and Observers’ Eye temperature during Control (C) and Air puff (AP).
Behavioural responses of subjects and observers during the tests (different letters after medians indicate significant differences, ns = not significant).
| Behaviour | Identity | X2 | df | Medians | highest posthoc p value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| C Pre-treat | C Treat | AP Pre-treat | AP Treat | |||||
| Ground peck | Subjects | 31.984 | 3 | 30a | 35a | 26.67a | 0b | <0.001 |
| Observers | 37.652 | 3 | 30a | 35a | 40a | 0b | <0.001 | |
| Stand | Subjects | 3.435 | 3 | 35 | 35 | 37 | 40 | ns |
| Observers | 8.765 | 3 | 35 | 35 | 40 | 50 | ns | |
| Sit | Subjects | 5.483 | 3 | 15 | 11 | 13 | 7 | ns |
| Observers | 4.473 | 3 | 15 | 15 | 10 | 5 | ns | |
| Preen | Subjects | 30.529 | 3 | 17a | 17a | 10a | 0b | 0.001 |
| Observers | 28.481 | 3 | 15a | 15a | 10a | 0b | 0.001 | |
| Freeze | Subjects | 57 | 3 | 0a | 0a | 0a | 40b | <0.001 |
| Observers | 57 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 30b | <0.001 | |
| Walk | Subjects | 4.5 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | ns |
| Observers | 2.589 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 0 | 0 | ns | |
Figure 3Correlations between Subjects’ and Observers’ Ground pecking during Control (C) and Air puff (AP).
Figure 8Correlations between Subjects’ and Observers’ Walking during Control (C) and Air puff (AP).
Figure 9Percentage of timepoints all members of the brood were synchronised in their behaviour (‘°’ outliers >1.5 × IQR).