NIRS People: Interview Dr Chunming Lu

4 min read

Dr Chunming Lu
Dr Chunming Lu

Chunming Lu’s lab in Beijing Normal University has published a paper titled “Shared neural representations of syntax during online dyadic communication” in NeuroImage. This is another fNIRS hyperscanning study within a month (check out another paper by Dr Xianchun Li and his group:! Lu’s lab studied the brain response of real time verbal communication between two people. We interviewed Dr Lu and his team and they are generous in sharing their experience about this study.

Congratulations on your recent paper in NeuroImage.

First of all, I would like to thank Dr. Xu Cui for giving me a chance to introduce our recent work at such a good place. Our work has benefited a lot from Dr. Cui’s pioneering work on fNIRS hyperscanning. His work has inspired a lot of studies in the past few years.

1. Reading your past publications I get a feel that you are very interested in studying the mechanism of human verbal communication. Why are you interested in this area?

My previous research mainly focused on the relationship between brain and language. I have been studying communication disorders such as stuttering for many years using fMRI. Stuttering is a common speech production disorder that affects about 1% of the general population. One of the major features of stuttering is that the typical symptoms of stuttering occurs more often in a dialog context. In a monolog or covert speech context, however, most people who stutter don’t stutter at all. Thus, it is suggested that social interaction play a key role in the relationship between brain and language. Since then I am keen to studying language (including verbal and nonverbal) communication in a social interaction context.

2. Since the experiment requires the participant to read, did the mouth or head motion introduce any artifact (noise) in the NIRS signal? If so, what did you do to remove/minimize it?

Speaking (and gesturing) will definitely introduce artifacts in the fNIRS signal. It is generally agreed that artifacts can only be avoided but can’t be removed. Fortunately, from our experiences, most of the artifacts resulted from movements can be avoided if you place the probes on the head appropriately.
But if artifacts do occur, what should we do? In our experiment, we have conducted a running-window procedure to identify the suspected artifacts. The percentage of time points that were contaminated by artifacts was less than 5%. We also conducted a simulation experiment by adding a variety of percent of artifacts to the signal (i.e., 5%, 10%, 15%, and 20%). The results showed that 15% artifacts would significantly decrease the detectability of the syntactic-related effect in our study. We also replaced the identified artifacts by means of the neighbor time points. The results of artifact-free data were the same as the raw data. These results indicate that data may not be significantly contaminated by artifacts when the artifacts are less than 5%.
There are several other good methods that can be used to deal with the artifacts issue. For instance, Dr. Cui has developed a nice method by calculating the correlation between the HBO and HBR signal. My colleague Dr. Haijing Niu also developed a software to do quality control,

3. This study is fairly big – you had 90 pairs of participants! What method did you use to recruit so many participants? Did you pay them? How long did it take to collect the data?

Thanks to BNU so that we could recruit so many participants ! Because psychology and cognitive neuroscience is one of the best disciplines of BNU, most students have interests and are willing to participant in psychological experiment. We also have some participants from other universities that are close to BNU.
Our participants were paid after the experiment. For each pair of the participants, the set up and performance of the experiment took about 1 hour in total.

4. You used wavelet transform coherence method to analyze the NIRS data. In your opinion, what is the advantage of wavelet over other methods?

I am aware that several different methods have been used to characterize interpersonal neural synchrony during social interaction. But so far WTC is one of the most popular methods among them, since its first application in Cui et al., 2012, NeuroImage.
WTC is my favorite because it provides both temporal and frequency information based on a relatively simple principle. During language communication, people usually produce 5-6 syllables per seconds, and they take turns in a dialog within a time window of less than 80-100 ms. Thus, a precise estimation on the temporal pattern is necessary for smooth communication. WTC allows us to take a close look at the temporally dynamic process of coordination during communication across many different frequency bands.
On the other hand, I also believe that there is no such a method that can address any issues. I would love to try different methods in different contexts.

5. How did you identify which frequency range/band to use to calculate the coherence?
What advice do you give to researchers who want to use fNIRS hyperscanning but have little experience?

Frequency selection has been considered as one of the key processes in fNIRS hyperscanning study. For studies that employed a traditional ER or BLOCK design, usually there is a priori hypothesis about the frequency of interest (FOI). For studies on naturalistic communication, however, so far there is no standard procedure for frequency selection.
During the past few years we have developed a procedure to address this issue (Zheng et al., 2018, HBM; Liu et al., 2019, NeuroImage). The idea is that the FOI should be defined based on a center and a range. The center should be a statistically strict threshold that determines the position of the frequency, whereas the range could be a relatively loose threshold that determines the width of the FOI. In Liu et al., 2019, the center was set as P < 0.0005 whereas the range was P < 0.05. All frequency ranges that survived this criteria were examined. In addition, the frequency ranges that totally overlapped among conditions were combined, whereas those differing in frequency position or range were considered independently.
Compared to EEG or fMRI, fNIRS is more friendly and easy to use. I believe that all people who have a good academic training are able to use it in their research.

6. Can you use one sentence to summarize your finding in this study?

A distinctive pattern of interpersonal neural synchronization underlies shared representations of syntax between interlocutors.

7. What is your plan for future research?
In the future, my research will continue to focus on the neural mechanism of language communication. We also have interests in how language is used in different social contexts, and how language is related to other aspects of cognition during social interactions.

第十九期 fNIRS Journal Club 通知 2021/05/29,9:30am

美国普渡大学童云杰助理教授,将为大家讲解他们组最近被接受的一篇使用近红外相位信息研究脑血流变化的文章。热烈欢迎大家参与讨论。 时间: 北京时间2021年5月29日上午9:30地点: https://zoom.com房间号: 846 8391 7517密码: 805190 童云杰教授简介:普渡大学 生物医学工程助理教授、博士生导师。主攻方向是多模态脑成像, 包括核磁,fNIRS, EEG。关注脑功能及生理信号的提取与研究。发表论文九十余篇,引用上千次(H-index = 20)。 童教授要讲解的文章如下: Liang Z, Tian H, Yang HC, Arimitsu T, Takahashi...
Xu Cui
12 sec read

第十八期 fNIRS Journal Club 视频

北京时间2021年4月25日10点,北京师范大学的朱朝喆教授为大家讲解了他们最近几年在经颅脑图谱(Transcranial brain Atlas) 方面做的工作。视频如下: Youtube: Youku: 该视频在优酷上传后被优酷屏蔽,不清楚什么原因。申诉无效。
Xu Cui
3 sec read


会议日期:2021年5月22日-24日会议地点:天津师范大学 一、 会议简介       近红外光谱脑功能成像(fNIRS)具有设备购买与使用成本低、可在自然环境条件下使用、具有较高的时间分辨率和空间定位能力等特点,受到了脑科学研究的高度重视。“近红外光谱脑功能成像学术会议”是由北京师范大学认知神经科学与学习国家重点实验室朱朝喆教授发起并组织的全国性学术会议。已连续成功举办六届,共吸引全国近百家高校、科研院所及医院的六百余名学者参加。该会议已成为国内规模和影响力最大的fNIRS脑成像学术活动。       本届会议由北京师范大学与天津师范大学联合主办。会议将延用往届会议将学术报告与研究方法工作坊相结合的模式。学术报告模块(5月22日周六)将邀请心理学与认知神经科学领域、基础与临床医学领域以及工程技术领域知名学者汇报其fNIRS最新研究成果;工作坊模块(5月23-24日)由fNIRS领域一线研究者系统讲授fNIRS成像原理、fNIRS实验设计、fNIRS数据分析与统计、fNIRS论文写作以及fNIRS前沿技术等。除理论讲授外,还设置了fNIRS空间定位与数据分析操作(NIRS-KIT软件)环节,此外还安排充足的研讨答疑时间以便与会人员交流互动。       具体日程与详细内容等最新消息请关注后续通知,可通过天津师范大学心理部网站或北京师范大学国家重点实验室网站,或者扫描下方二维码关注微信公众号-“fNIRS脑成像实验室”查阅更新信息,期盼在天津师范大学与您相聚! 二、会议组织机构 主办单位:教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地天津师范大学心理与行为研究院、天津师范大学心理学部、北京师范大学认知神经科学与学习国家重点实验室会议主席:白学军、朱朝喆组织委员会:赵春健、杨邵峰、侯鑫、曹正操 三、说明1.        学术报告模块注册费:人民币500元/人;工作坊模块注册费:人民币2500元/人。发票为电子发票,内容均为:“会议费”。两个模块各自独立收费,参会者可根据自己需要进行选择。2.        注册费包括各自模块的资料费、午餐费;其他费用自理。3.        会议报告人免除会议模块注册费,其他费用请自理。4.       ...
Xu Cui
18 sec read

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *