Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2025 Aug 18;27(8):873.
doi: 10.3390/e27080873.

Brain Oscillations and Autonomic Synthonization via Comodulation in Collaborative Negotiation

Affiliations

Brain Oscillations and Autonomic Synthonization via Comodulation in Collaborative Negotiation

Katia Rovelli et al. Entropy (Basel). .

Abstract

This study investigates the relationship between neural and physiological synthonization via comodulation (Synth) in dyadic exchanges centered on negotiation processes. In total, 13 dyads participated in a negotiation task with three phases: Initiation (IP), Negotiation Core (NCP), and Resolution (RP). Electroencephalographic (EEG) frequency bands (i.e., delta, theta, alpha) and autonomic responses (heart rate variability, HRV) were recorded. Synth was analyzed using Euclidean distance (EuDist) for EEG and autonomic indices. Significant Synth in delta, theta, and alpha bands in temporo-central and parieto-occipital regions was observed, indicating social cognitive alignment. HRV Synth was higher during the NCP than IP, suggesting better coordination. Based on this result, a cluster analysis was performed on HRV EuDist to identify distinct groups based on HRV, and eventually personality patterns, that revealed one cluster with higher Synth and reward sensitivity, and another with lower Synth and reward sensitivity. These findings show how neural and autonomic Synth enhances social cognition and emotional regulation.

Keywords: autonomic responses; decision-making; emotion regulation; inter-brain connectivity; negotiation; neural synthonization.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
(a) Experimental procedure and (b) EEG electrode placement.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Cluster analysis results for HRV parameters. (a) A dendrogram representing the hierarchical clustering of the dataset. (b) Mean values of HRV parameters (IPHRV, NCPHRV, RPHRV) for the identified clusters. (c) A gap statistic plot indicating the optimal number of clusters. (d) A Principal Component Analysis (PCA) biplot showing the distribution of subjects in two-dimensional space (Dim1 and Dim2), with clusters represented by different symbols and convex hulls. Cluster 1 is depicted with circles, while Cluster 2 is represented with triangles.
Figure 3
Figure 3
The EuDist index across different regions of interest (ROIs). Each panel represents a different frequency band: (a) delta, (b) theta, (c) alpha. The y-axis indicates the EuDist index, while the x-axis represents three brain regions: frontal (ROI-F), temporo-central (ROI-TC), and parieto-occipital (ROI-PO). Error bars represent Standard Error (SE). Asterisks (*) indicate statistically significant differences between ROIs.
Figure 4
Figure 4
The EuDist index across task phases in the beta (a) and gamma (b) frequency bands, plotted separately for each region of interest (F = frontal; TC = temporo-central; PO = parieto-occipital). While descriptive trends suggest modest phase-related variations, no statistically significant effects or interactions were observed for either frequency band (all p > 0.05). Error bars represent standard deviations.
Figure 5
Figure 5
EuDist HRV index across phases (Initiation Phase IP, Negotiation Core Phase NCP, and Resolution Phase RP). Asterisks (*) indicate the statistically significant difference between the NCP and IP.
Figure 6
Figure 6
BAS Reward Responsiveness results. Asterisks (*) indicate the statistically significant difference between Cluster 1 and Cluster 2.

Similar articles

References

    1. Chater N., Zeitoun H., Melkonyan T. The Paradox of Social Interaction: Shared Intentionality, We-Reasoning, and Virtual Bargaining. Psychol. Rev. 2022;129:415. doi: 10.1037/rev0000343. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bazerman M.H., Curhan J.R., Moore D.A., Valley K.L. Negotiation. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2000;51:279–314. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.279. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Cominelli L., Folgieri R., Lucchiari C. Neuroscience and Law: Complicated Crossings and New Perspectives. Springer; Berlin, Germany: 2020. Empowering Negotiating Skills in Law Professionals: Neuro-Cognitive Applications; pp. 139–161.
    1. Varga S., Krueger J. Background Emotions, Proximity and Distributed Emotion Regulation. Rev. Philos. Psychol. 2013;4:271–292. doi: 10.1007/s13164-013-0134-7. - DOI
    1. Barry B., Oliver R.L. Affect in Dyadic Negotiation: A Model and Propositions. Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 1996;67:127–143. doi: 10.1006/obhd.1996.0069. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources