Back

Quantifying Physiological Synchrony through Windowed Cross-Correlation Analysis: Statistical and Theoretical Considerations

Behrens, F.; Moulder, R. G.; Boker, S. M.; Kret, M.

2020-08-28 physiology
10.1101/2020.08.27.269746 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Interpersonal synchrony is a widely studied phenomenon. A great challenge is to statistically capture the dynamics of social interactions with fluctuating levels of synchrony and varying delays between responses of individuals. Windowed Cross-Correlation analysis accounts for both characteristics by segmenting the time series into smaller windows and shifting the segments of two interacting individuals away from each other up to a maximum lag. Despite evidence showing that these parameters affect the estimated synchrony level, there is a lack of guidelines on which parameter configurations to use. The current study aimed to close this knowledge gap by comparing the effect of different parameter configurations on two outcome criteria: (1) the ability to distinguish synchrony from pseudosynchrony by means of surrogate data analyses, and (2) the sensitivity to detect change in synchrony as measured by the difference between two within-subject conditions. Focusing on physiological synchrony, we performed these analyses on heartrate, skin conductance level, pupil size, and facial expressions data. Results revealed that a range of parameters was able to discriminate synchrony from pseudosynchrony. Window size was more influential than the maximum lag with smaller window sizes showing better discrimination. No clear patterns emerged for the second criterion. Integrating the statistical findings and theoretical considerations regarding the physiological characteristics and biological boundaries of the signals, we provide recommendations for optimizing the parameter settings to the signal of interest.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.