Ilenia Falcinelli
Chiara Fini
Anna M. Borghi- 1Department of Dynamic and Clinical Psychology, and Health Studies, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy
- 2Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Technologies, Italian National Research Council, Rome, Italy
1 The role of social interaction in acquiring and using abstract concepts
People constantly use concepts, allowing them to capture similar and different elements between objects and situations (Reilly et al., 2025), as mental shortcuts to organize information and navigate the inner and external world (Murphy, 2002; Villani et al., 2021).
Research has traditionally differentiated more concrete from more abstract concepts based on the reliance of the former on sensorimotor experiences (Paivio, 1990; Schwanenflugel et al., 1992). More abstract concepts typically lack a single physical referent and are more complex, heterogeneous, and variable in their meaning across people and contexts (Borghi and Mazzuca, 2023; Lewis et al., 2023). They are also usually acquired later than concrete ones, and this is mediated by language (e.g., Della Rosa et al., 2010; Wauters et al., 2003). Studies on language production (Brown, 1957, as reported in Schwanenflugel, 1991) and child-parent interaction (Bellagamba et al., 2022; Gillette et al., 1999) confirm that abstract concepts emerge later than concrete concepts; behavioral work also shows that emotional valence influences their acquisition (Lund et al., 2019; Ponari et al., 2018). In adults, most data show that abstract concepts are processed and recalled more poorly than concrete concepts (Concreteness effect, Paivio, 1990), likely due to their difficulty and variability. Research also testify that the distinction between abstract and concrete concepts may shift (Barsalou et al., 2018) in light of demographic characteristics, expertise, and context: for example, for older adults, technological concepts are more abstract than for younger adults (Falcinelli et al., 2024a), chemists consider H2O as less abstract than laypeople (Mazzuca et al., 2025a) and the concepts of gender is less abstractly characterized in a Dutch than an Italian sample (Mazzuca et al., 2024). Similarly, recent research highlights the multidimensional character of concepts: abstract concepts also evoke sensorimotor experiences, and each abstract concept kind, from emotions to numbers (Conca et al., 2021), is characterized by sensorimotor, linguistic, interoceptive, proprioceptive, and social experiences to varying degrees of significance (Borghi, 2022; Reilly et al., 2025).
In this opinion paper, we will focus on studies that highlight the role social interaction plays in abstract concepts' acquisition and use (Borghi et al., 2025).
The importance of social exchange for their acquisition is demonstrated across age groups: for instance, in children, extensive pacifier use, which might limit linguistic exchange, correlates with a less sharp abstract-concrete distinction (Barca et al., 2017), and adults report learning abstract concepts mainly through language (Falcinelli et al., 2024a,b; Villani et al., 2019).
The presence of others remains crucial for abstract concepts beyond first learning (Borghi et al., 2019; Dove et al., 2020; Fini and Borghi, 2019). Adults report less confidence in mastering abstract concepts and a higher need to rely on others to fully understand them (Falcinelli et al., 2024a,b; Fini et al., 2023; Mazzuca et al., 2022). In addition, in simulated conversations abstract topics lead to more expressions of uncertainty, questions, and need to continue the interaction (Villani et al., 2022), aspects which people also judge as more plausible for abstract concepts (Mazzuca et al., 2025b). Consistently, a preceding linguistic interaction on an abstract topic enhances to a greater extent participants' motor synchronization in a joint action task (Fini et al., 2021), and people are usually more open to negotiating abstract than concrete concepts' meaning (Falcinelli et al., 2024a; Fini et al., 2023).
Neuroscientific findings support these behavioral data, showing that, compared to more concrete ones, abstract concepts recruit to a greater extent brain networks including areas related to language and social cognition, such as the left inferior frontal gyrus (LIFG), the anterior temporal lobe (ATL), the left superior temporal sulcus/gyrus (LSTS/STG), and the left middle temporal gyrus (LMTG; for reviews, Borghi et al., 2019; Montefinese, 2019; for a meta-analysis, Wang et al., 2010).
The LIFG is typically associated with verbal working memory, semantic control, and executive regulation. Its higher activation for abstract concepts has been attributed to their greater variability and semantic complexity, which may require enhanced executive control, longer maintenance of abstract concepts in phonological short-term memory, and a more substantial involvement of inner speech (Binder et al., 2005; Della Rosa et al., 2018; Fernyhough and Borghi, 2023). Similarly, some evidence indicates that the LMTG, an area involved in semantic retrieval, is more strongly activated by abstract concepts, in line with their stronger association with linguistic rather than sensorimotor experience (Noppeney and Price, 2004). In addition, the ATL—commonly implicated in the semantic processing of auditory/verbal stimuli and according to some positions also in social cognition (Balgova et al., 2022; Visser and Lambon Ralph, 2011)—seems to show a stronger activation in its superior portion for abstract concepts, whereas in its ventromedial portion for concrete ones (Binney et al., 2016; Hoffman et al., 2015). Finally, some studies provide evidence that abstract concepts more greatly recruit the LSTS and STG, two regions involved in social cognition (Theory of Mind), along with auditory processing (Hoffman et al., 2015). According to some evidence, indeed, their activations and that of LIFG primarily depend on the (emotional-)social content of the provided stimuli (Mellem et al., 2016).
Despite the valuable insights coming from reviewed behavioral and neuroscientific studies, up to now evidence on the role of linguistic, social interactions for abstractness is mainly based on a “single-brain” approach (De Felice et al., 2023) where individuals are tested in isolation, for instance by asking them to evaluate concepts on semantic aspects (Falcinelli et al., 2024a,b; Fini et al., 2023; Mazzuca et al., 2022) or performing implicit tasks (e.g., semantic/lexical decision or judgment tasks) while recording cerebral activity (e.g., Della Rosa et al., 2018; Wang et al., 2018). Field research has recently moved toward more interactive—mainly conversational—paradigms, which allow researchers to explore communicative behaviors and indices of alignment between interlocutors (Fini et al., 2021; Mazzuca et al., 2025b; Villani et al., 2022). However, even these studies present some limits. First, experimental situations remain largely confined within the rigid setting of the laboratory. New positions are instead encouraging to “bring the laboratory to the real world,” to better account for the multiple and interrelated variables present in authentic situations (Vigliocco et al., 2024). Second, the reviewed interactive studies are mostly behavioral, neglecting other informative aspects like the online, synchronous neural processes that might occur between interagents. A complete understanding of the social mechanisms underlying abstract concepts' acquisition and use might therefore widely benefit from a more interactive neuroscientific perspective, inspired by the so-called “second-person neuroscience” (Konvalinka and Roepstorff, 2012), which allows for examining the neural coordination occurring during social interactions (Minagawa et al., 2018).
2 The promises of second person neuroscience and hyperscanning
“Second-person” neuroscience is a recent approach that goes beyond the traditional single-person perspective by studying brain activity during real-time social interactions (Redcay and Schilbach, 2019; Schilbach et al., 2013). Its key methodology is hyperscanning, consisting of the simultaneous recording of brain activity from two or more individuals (Montague et al., 2002). Hyperscanning can be implemented through different neuroimaging techniques, among which the most commonly used are EEG and fNIRS (Czeszumski et al., 2020). EEG enables to directly detect brain activity by recording neural oscillations through scalp electrodes, offering the advantage of capturing fast neural dynamics with a high temporal resolution (milliseconds; Czeszumski et al., 2020; Zamm et al., 2024); in contrast, fNIRS measures brain activity indirectly by assessing changes in blood oxygenation levels by detecting near-infrared light absorption. Although fNIRS provides slower (hemodynamic) data, it is more resistant to motion artifacts and allows for a better spatial localization (Cui et al., 2012; Czeszumski et al., 2020). Through these modalities, hyperscanning enables to capture the Inter-Brain Synchronization (IBS)—i.e., the temporal alignment or correlation of neural activity patterns between people (Montague et al., 2002)—, which represents an index of the harmonization in underlying neural processes (Kelsen et al., 2022). Mechanistically, IBS arises when participants' neural oscillations or hemodynamic responses become temporally entrained during social exchanges, potentially driven by reciprocal sensorimotor and cognitive feedback. The quantification of IBS can be extracted from several indices: EEG-based measures include inter-brain phase coherence, phase-locking value, and phase locking index, capturing consistent phase relationships in neural oscillations across brains (Gugnowska et al., 2022; Müller and Lindenberger, 2023); fNIRS analyses instead typically use coherence or correlation of oxygenated and deoxygenated hemoglobin signals between homologous regions of interacting participants, allowing the detection of harmonic hemodynamic patterns related to social behaviors (Cui et al., 2012; Fishburn et al., 2018).
The advent of the portable version of EEG and fNIRS devices, which reduce physical constraints, has further extended hyperscaning possibilities, allowing researchers to perform more realistic or outdoor studies with ease (Astolfi et al., 2011).
Also due to this, hyperscanning research has increasingly expanded around the globe (Grasso-Cladera et al., 2024), to investigate the “social brain” during various “life-skills” like cooperation, competition, and communication (e.g., Astolfi et al., 2020; Balconi and Vanutelli, 2017, 2018; Ahn et al., 2018), embedded in several situations such as knowledge sharing (e.g., Bevilacqua et al., 2019; Dikker et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2022), naturalistic conversations (e.g., Ahn et al., 2018; Kinreich et al., 2017; Kustova et al., 2023; Pérez et al., 2019), work reviews (e.g., Balconi et al., 2020), clinical interventions (e.g., Pan and Cheng, 2020; Zhang et al., 2018), musical synchronization (e.g., Gugnowska et al., 2022; Müller and Lindenberger, 2023), playing games (e.g., Astolfi et al., 2009; Jahng et al., 2017), or simply resting state situations (e.g., Kustova et al., 2023; Zheng et al., 2020).
In our view, hyperscanning research focusing on spoken language—specifically, on knowledge sharing and naturalistic discussions—may be particularly beneficial for investigating the role of social exchanges for abstractness, as we discuss below.
3 Hyperscanning studies on knowledge sharing and their potentialities for investigating abstract concepts' acquisition
Hyperscanning research has extensively investigated knowledge sharing in real classroom contexts, focusing on synchronous brain dynamics occurring between teacher and students (De Felice et al., 2023; Kelsen et al., 2022; Tan et al., 2023, for reviews).
A central finding is that interactive learning—such as active discussions, scaffolding questions, video usage, or personalized feedback—fosters greater teacher-student and student-student IBS than traditional lecture-based methods (Dikker et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2020).
In this context, IBS has been mainly found in prefrontal and temporo-parietal regions (Bevilacqua et al., 2019; Dikker et al., 2017; Pan et al., 2020)—areas usually associated with social cognition, mentalizing system, and linguistic abilities (Kelsen et al., 2022)—with greater IBS in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) at increased teachers' expertise (Sun et al., 2020), and higher IBS in the right temporo-parietal junction (Zheng et al., 2018) and in the sensorimotor and left parietal cortices (Zheng et al., 2020; Zhu et al., 2022) at increased interactivity of pedagogical techniques.
Crucially, enhanced IBS correlates with improved learning outcomes (Pan et al., 2020; Zheng et al., 2018). For example, greater expert-student IBS in the dlPFC during cooperative learning aligns with performance gains (Sun et al., 2020). Similarly, segmented, interactive musical teaching increases IBS in the bilateral inferior frontal cortex and correlates with better skill acquisition (Pan et al., 2018).
Taken together, these findings suggest that social, interactive learning induces stronger teacher-student neural coupling and better learning outcomes. Given that abstract concepts greatly rely on linguistic and social input for their acquisition, we contend that translating this approach into categorization research—for instance, by investigating parent-infant interaction for basic concepts or expert-layperson exchanges for scientific concepts, both face-to-face and technologically-mediated/supported—could significantly deepen the understanding of the social underpinnings of abstract concepts' acquisition.
4 Hyperscanning studies on natural discussions and their potentialities for investigating abstract concepts' use
Hyperscanning research has expanded beyond structured learning to explore brain-to-brain coupling during authentic verbal interactions, often using portable fNIRS or EEG for more ecological validity (Kelsen et al., 2022, for a review). Consistent with prior findings (Section 3), higher IBS emerges mainly in frontal and temporal-parietal regions. For example, Jiang et al. (2012) showed increased IBS in the left inferior frontal cortex during face-to-face dialogues compared to monologs or back-to-back talks.
Integrating these findings, some studies suggest that several factors modulate IBS during free interactions: among them, social bounds—romantic couples exhibit stronger temporal-parietal synchrony than strangers (Kinreich et al., 2017)—, employed language—different IBS patterns (i.e., more concentrated vs. more distributed) emerge in fronto-central areas during conversations in native versus second languages (Pérez et al., 2019)—and type of interaction setting—for instance, in simulated counseling sessions, greater counselor-client IBS in the right temporal-parietal junction was associated with a stronger therapeutic alliance (Zhang et al., 2018); similarly, increased IBS in frontal regions was found between a manager and an employee during a non-rating than rating simulated performance review (Balconi et al., 2020).
Furthermore, some EEG and MEG studies focusing on turn-taking—a pillar of conversation—reveal significant speaker-listener phase synchronization (in alpha, gamma, and theta bands) within frontal and temporal-parietal areas, suggesting the presence of neural mechanisms supporting speech coordination (Ahn et al., 2018; Kawasaki et al., 2013; Pérez et al., 2017). Crucially, preliminary data show that informal free dialogue between mentor and mentee fosters higher IBS (in theta, alpha, and beta bands) than structured work discussions, indicating that more reciprocal and flexible interactions promote greater neural synchrony (Kustova et al., 2023).
Collectively, these findings suggest that neural coupling mechanisms support coordination and mutual understanding in free communication, with higher IBS observed in less structured conversation formats. This body of research provides a promising avenue for investigating the significance of social interaction when using abstract concepts. Given that abstract concepts are more variable (Section 1), the neural coupling captured via hyperscanning in naturalistic conversations can illuminate how interlocutors refine, negotiate, and co-construct their meaning in real-time, also considering some impacting aspects like the kind of bond, the interactive situation (e.g., symmetric vs. asymmetric) and the main interaction style (imitating vs. complementary) of interlocutors.
5 Conclusions
Since abstract concepts are more complex and variable than concrete ones, the presence of others is fundamental for their acquisition and use. Current field studies, however, typically employ a “single-brain” approach or, when more interactive, they rely only on behavioral data collected in laboratory settings.
The emerging field of second-person neuroscience, via hyperscanning, offers a promising approach to addressing these limitations. Hyperscanning simultaneously records the brain activity of multiple interacting individuals, capturing the online IBS occurring among them. IBS has been consistently found in frontal and temporal-parietal regions, which are linked to social cognition, mentalizing, and language, across several real-time situations like knowledge sharing and naturalistic conversations. In our view, the integration between these two fields may enhance categorization research: knowledge-sharing research can illuminate the neural mechanisms underlying abstract concept acquisition; naturalistic conversation research can deepen our understanding of how interlocutors' brains align when they co-construct and negotiate abstract concepts' meanings. This integration might also represent a unique opportunity to extend the existing single-brain neuroscientific findings by investigating whether linguistic and social critical regions (i.e., LIFG, ATL, LSTS/STG, and LMTG) synchronize more across brains during social exchanges on abstract than concrete concepts. Portable hyperscanning technologies can assist these explorations, by facilitating studies in more ecological settings.
Despite these advantages, hyperscanning research is still facing significant technical and theoretical challenges (Zamm et al., 2024). These include its inherently correlational nature that limits causal inference (Novembre and Iannetti, 2021), the risk that observed IBS may be a simple reflection of common sensorimotor inputs rather than the expression of high-level alignment processes (Hamilton, 2021; Holroyd, 2022), the current absence of standardized theoretical frameworks and measurement methods (Holroyd, 2022; see also Section 2) and also practical set-up issues, such as ensuring a precise synchronization between brain recordings and stimuli presentation across interacting individuals (Barraza et al., 2019; for other technical issues, see Zamm et al., 2024). Addressing these aspects requires rigorous and standardized operational definitions, experimental set-ups, methodologies, and data pipelines (for examples see Chidichimo et al., 2025; Kayhan et al., 2022; Zimmermann et al., 2024).
In addition, like single-brain studies, hyperscanning research can suffer from the intrinsic constraints of the employed methodologies. For instance, although fNIRS provides better spatial resolution than EEG, it is restricted to cortical surface activity due to the shallow penetration depth of near-infrared light (Czeszumski et al., 2020; Zamm et al., 2024). This aspect might limit the investigation of the role of critical but deeper brain structures—such as the ATL—in shared dynamics occurring during abstract concepts' acquisition and use. Fortunately, hyperscanning research could draw upon solutions found for similar challenges in other fields (e.g., development of optimized acquisition sequences to reduce signal dropout in fMRI studies—Embleton et al., 2010; Halai et al., 2014, 2024), or, at least, benefit from the integration of multiple imaging and bodily measures within the same study (Grasso-Cladera et al., 2024).
In conclusion, by taking proper precautions, translating current hyperscanning research on spoken language into the field of categorization could yield interesting insights into how abstract concepts are acquired and used in the presence of others, thereby enriching categorization research.
Author contributions
IF: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Writing – original draft. CF: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization. AB: Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. The study was funded by the Project Sapienza Excellence Grant n. RG123188B09BDF14 “Ecological, Technological and Gender Concepts and Their Variations Across the Lifespan.” The Sponsor was not involved in the manuscript preparation.
Acknowledgments
We thank the members of the Body, Action, and Language Lab (BALLab) for the insightful discussions that inspired the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The author(s) declared that they were an editorial board member of Frontiers, at the time of submission. This had no impact on the peer review process and the final decision.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If you identify any issues, please contact us.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Ahn, S., Cho, H., Kwon, M., Kim, K., Kwon, H., Kim, B. S., et al. (2018). Interbrain phase synchronization during turn-taking verbal interaction—a hyperscanning study using simultaneous EEG/MEG. Hum. Brain Mapp. 39, 171–188. doi: 10.1002/hbm.23834
Astolfi, L., Cincotti, F., Mattia, D., De Vico Fallani, F., Salinari, S., Marciani, M. G., et al. (2009). Estimation of the cortical activity from simultaneous multi-subject recordings during the prisoner's dilemma. Annu. Int. Conf. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Soc. 1937–1939. doi: 10.1109/IEMBS.2009.5333456
Astolfi, L., Toppi, J., Ciaramidaro, A., Vogel, P., Freitag, C. M., Siniatchkin, M., et al. (2020). Raising the bar: can dual scanning improve our understanding of joint action? Neuroimage 216:116813. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116813
Astolfi, L., Toppi, J., Fallani, F. D. V., Vecchiato, G., Cincotti, F., Wilke, C. T., et al. (2011). Imaging the social brain by simultaneous hyperscanning during subject interaction. IEEE Int. Syst. 26, 38–45. doi: 10.1109/MIS.2011.61
Balconi, M., and Vanutelli, M. E. (2017). Cooperation and competition with hyperscanning methods: review and future application to emotion domain. Front. Comput. Neurosci. 11:86. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2017.00086
Balconi, M., and Vanutelli, M. E. (2018). EEG hyperscanning and behavioral synchronization during joint actions. Neuropsychol. Trends 24, 23–47. doi: 10.7358/neur-2018-024-balc
Balconi, M., Venturella, I., Fronda, G., and Vanutelli, M. E. (2020). Leader-employee emotional “interpersonal tuning”: an EEG coherence study. Soc. Neurosci. 15, 234–243. doi: 10.1080/17470919.2019.1696226
Balgova, E., Diveica, V., Walbrin, J., and Binney, R. J. (2022). The role of the ventrolateral anterior temporal lobes in social cognition. Hum. Brain Mapp. 43, 4589–4608. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25976
Barca, L., Mazzuca, C., and Borghi, A. M. (2017). Pacifier overuse and conceptual relations of abstract and emotional concepts. Front. Psychol. 8:2014. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02014
Barraza, P., Dumas, G., Liu, H., Blanco-Gomez, G., van den Heuvel, M. I., Baart, M., et al. (2019). Implementing EEG hyperscanning setups. MethodsX 6, 428–436. doi: 10.1016/j.mex.2019.02.021
Barsalou, L. W., Dutriaux, L., and Scheepers, C. (2018). Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci. 373:20170144. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2017.0144
Bellagamba, F., Borghi, A. M., Mazzuca, C., Pecora, G., Ferrara, F., and Fogel, A. (2022). Abstractness emerges progressively over the second year of life. Sci. Rep. 12:20940. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-25426-5
Bevilacqua, D., Davidesco, I., Wan, L., Chaloner, K., Rowland, J., Ding, M., et al. (2019). Brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes vary by student-teacher dynamics: evidence from a real-world classroom electroencephalography study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 31, 401–411. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_01274
Binder, J. R., Westbury, C. F., McKiernan, K. A., Possing, E. T., and Medler, D. A. (2005). Distinct brain systems for processing concrete and abstract concepts. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 17, 905–917. doi: 10.1162/0898929054021102
Binney, R. J., Hoffman, P., and Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2016). Mapping the multiple graded contributions of the anterior temporal lobe representational hub to abstract and social concepts: evidence from distortion-corrected fMRI. Cerebr. Cortex, 26, 4227–4241. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhw260
Borghi, A. M. (2022). Concepts for which we need others more: the case of abstract concepts. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 31, 238–246. doi: 10.1177/09637214221079625
Borghi, A. M., Barca, L., Binkofski, F., Castelfranchi, C., Pezzulo, G., and Tummolini, L. (2019). Words as social tools: Language, sociality and inner grounding in abstract concepts. Phys. Life Rev. 29, 120–153. doi: 10.1016/j.plrev.2018.12.001
Borghi, A. M., and Mazzuca, C. (2023). Grounded cognition, linguistic relativity, and abstract concepts. Top. Cogn. Sci. 15, 662–667. doi: 10.1111/tops.12663
Borghi, A. M., Mazzuca, C., and Tummolini, L. (2025). The role of social interaction in the formation and use of abstract concepts. Nat. Rev. Psychol. 4, 470–483. doi: 10.1038/s44159-025-00451-z
Brown, R. W. (1957). Linguistic determinism and the part of speech. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 55:1. doi: 10.1037/h0041199
Chidichimo, E., Luppi, A., Mediano, P., Leong, V., Dumas, G., Canales-Johnson, A., et al. (2025). Towards an informational account of interpersonal coordination. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. doi: 10.1038/s41583-025-00989-0
Conca, F., Borsa, V. M., Cappa, S. F., and Catricalà, E. (2021). The multidimensionality of abstract concepts: A systematic review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 127, 474–491. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.05.004
Cui, X., Bryant, D. M., and Reiss, A. L. (2012). NIRS-based hyperscanning reveals increased interpersonal coherence in superior frontal cortex during cooperation. Neuroimage 59, 2430–2437. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.09.003
Czeszumski, A., Eustergerling, S., Lang, A., Menrath, D., Gerstenberger, M., Schuberth, S., et al. (2020). Hyperscanning: a valid method to study neural inter-brain underpinnings of social interaction. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 14:39. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2020.00039
De Felice, S., Hamilton, A. F. D. C., Ponari, M., and Vigliocco, G. (2023). Learning from others is good, with others is better: the role of social interaction in human acquisition of new knowledge. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. B 378:20210357. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2021.0357
Della Rosa, P. A., Catricalà, E., Canini, M., Vigliocco, G., and Cappa, S. F. (2018). The left inferior frontal gyrus: a neural crossroads between abstract and concrete knowledge. Neuroimage 175, 449–459. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.04.021
Della Rosa, P. A., Catricalà, E., Vigliocco, G., and Cappa, S. F. (2010). Beyond the abstract-concrete dichotomy: mode of acquisition, concreteness, imageability, familiarity, age of acquisition, context availability and abstractness norms for a set of 417 Italian words. Behav. Res. Methods 42, 1042–1048. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.4.1042
Dikker, S., Wan, L., Davidesco, I., Kaggen, L., Oostrik, M., McClintock, J., et al. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Curr. Biol. 27, 1375–1380. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.04.002
Dove, G., Barca, L., Tummolini, L., and Borghi, A. M. (2020). Words have a weight: Language as a source of inner grounding and flexibility in abstract concepts. Psychol. Res. 122, 1–17. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/j6xhe
Embleton, K. V., Haroon, H. A., Morris, D. M., Ralph, M. A. L., and Parker, G. J. M. M. (2010). Distortion correction for diffusion-weighted MRI tractography and fMRI in the temporal lobes. Hum. Brain Mapp. 31, 1570–1587. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20959
Falcinelli, I., Fini, C., Mazzuca, C., Alessandri, G., Alivernini, F., Baiocco, R., et al. (2024a). What does “Internet” mean to us as we age? A multi-task investigation on the conceptualization of the technological domain across generations. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. 16:100531. doi: 10.1016/j.chbr.2024.100531
Falcinelli, I., Fini, C., Mazzuca, C., and Borghi, A. M. (2024b). The TECo database: technological and ecological concepts at the interface between abstractness and concreteness. Collabra Psychol. 10:120327. doi: 10.1525/collabra.120327
Fernyhough, C., and Borghi, A. M. (2023). Inner speech as language process and cognitive tool. Trends Cogn. Sci. 27, 1180–1193. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2023.08.014
Fini, C., and Borghi, A. M. (2019). Sociality to reach objects and to catch meaning. Front. Psychol. 10:838. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00838
Fini, C., Era, V., da Rold, F., Candidi, M., and Borghi, A. M. (2021). Abstract concepts in interaction: the need of others when guessing abstract concepts smooths dyadic motor interactions. R. Soc. Open Sci. 8:201205. doi: 10.1098/rsos.201205
Fini, C., Falcinelli, I., Cuomo, G., Era, V., Candidi, M., Tummolini, L., et al. (2023). Breaking the ice in a conversation: abstract words prompt dialogs more easily than concrete ones. Lang. Cogn. 15, 629–650. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2023.3
Fishburn, F. A., Murty, V. P., Hlutkowsky, C. O., MacGillivray, C. E., Bemis, L. M., Murphy, M. E., et al. (2018). Putting our heads together: interpersonal neural synchronization as a biological mechanism for shared intentionality. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 13, 841–849. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsy060
Gillette, J., Gleitman, H., Gleitman, L., and Lederer, A. (1999). Human simulations of vocabulary learning. Cognition 73, 135–176. doi: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00036-0
Grasso-Cladera, A., Costa-Cordella, S., Mattoli-Sánchez, J., Vilina, E., Santander, V., Hiltner, S. E., et al. (2024). Embodied hyperscanning for studying social interaction: a scoping review of simultaneous brain and body measurements. Soc. Neurosci. 20, 163–9. doi: 10.31234/osf.io/6qzew
Gugnowska, K., Novembre, G., Kohler, N., Villringer, A., Keller, P. E., and Sammler, D. (2022). Endogenous sources of interbrain synchrony in duetting pianists. Cereb. Cortex, 32, 4110–4127. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhab469
Halai, A. D., Henson, R. N., Finoia, P., and Correia, M. M. (2024). Comparing the effect of multi gradient echo and multi band fMRI during a semantic task. biorXiv. [Preprint]. doi: 10.1101/2024.03.20.585909
Halai, A. D., Welbourne, S. R., Embleton, K., and Parkes, L. M. (2014). A comparison of dual gradient-echo and spin-echo fMRI of the inferior temporal lobe. Hum. Brain Mapp. 35, 4118–4128. doi: 10.1002/hbm.22463
Hamilton, A. F. C. (2021). Hyperscanning: beyond the hype. Neuron 109, 404–407. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2020.11.008
Hoffman, P., Binney, R. J., and Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2015). Differing contributions of inferior prefrontal and anterior temporal cortex to concrete and abstract conceptual knowledge. Cortex 63, 250–266. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2014.09.001
Holroyd, C. B. (2022). Interbrain synchrony: on wavy ground. Trends Neurosci. 45, 346–357. doi: 10.1016/j.tins.2022.02.002
Jahng, J., Kralik, J. D., Hwang, D.-U., and Jeong, J. (2017). Neural dynamics of two players when using nonverbal cues to gauge intentions to cooperate during the Prisoner's Dilemma Game. Neuroimage 157, 263–274. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.024
Jiang, J., Dai, B., Peng, D., Zhu, C., Liu, L., and Lu, C. (2012). Neural synchronization during face-to-face communication. J. Neurosci. 32, 16064–16069. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2926-12.2012
Kawasaki, M., Yamada, Y., Ushiku, Y., Miyauchi, E., and Yamaguchi, Y. (2013). Inter-brain synchronization during coordination of speech rhythm in human-to-human social interaction. Sci. Rep. 3:1692. doi: 10.1038/srep01692
Kayhan, E., Matthes, D., Haresign, I. M., Bánki, A., Michel, C., Langeloh, M., et al. (2022). DEEP: a dual EEG pipeline for developmental hyperscanning studies. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 54:101104. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2022.101104
Kelsen, B. A., Sumich, A., Kasabov, N., Liang, S. H., and Wang, G. Y. (2022). What has social neuroscience learned from hyperscanning studies of spoken communication? A systematic review. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 132, 1249–1262. doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.09.008
Kinreich, S., Djalovski, A., Kraus, L., Louzoun, Y., and Feldman, R. (2017). Brain-to-brain synchrony during naturalistic social interactions. Sci. Rep. 7:17060. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17339-5
Konvalinka, I., and Roepstorff, A. (2012). The two-brain approach: how can mutually interacting brains teach us something about social interaction? Front. Hum. Neurosci. 6:215. doi: 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00215
Kustova, T., Vodneva, A., Oreshina, G., Golovanova, I., Zhukova, M., and Grigorenko, E. (2023). “Interbrain synchrony during mentor-mentee verbal interaction. preliminary results of EEG-Hyperscanning Study,” in 2023 Fifth International Conference Neurotechnologies and Neurointerfaces (CNN) (IEEE), 39–41. doi: 10.1109/CNN59923.2023.10275267
Lewis, M., Cahill, A., Madnani, N., and Evans, J. (2023). Local similarity and global variability characterize the semantic space of human languages. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 120:e2300986120. doi: 10.1073/pnas.2300986120
Lund, T. C., Sidhu, D. M., and Pexman, P. M. (2019). Sensitivity to emotion information in children's lexical processing. Cognition 190, 61–71. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2019.04.017
Mazzuca, C., Arcovito, M., Falcinelli, I., Fini, C., and Borghi, A. M. (2025a). Water is and is not H2O, depending on who you ask: conceptualizations of water vary across chemists and laypeople. Cogn. Sci. 49:e70094. doi: 10.1111/cogs.70094
Mazzuca, C., Borghi, A. M., van Putten, S., Lugli, L., Nicoletti, R., and Majid, A. (2024). Gender is conceptualized in different ways across cultures. Lang. Cogn. 16, 353–379. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2023.40
Mazzuca, C., Falcinelli, I., Michalland, A. H., Tummolini, L., and Borghi, A. M. (2022). Bodily, emotional, and public sphere at the time of COVID-19. An investigation on concrete and abstract concepts. Psychol. Res. 86, 2266–2277. doi: 10.1007/s00426-021-01633-z
Mazzuca, C., Villani, C., Lamarra, T., Bolognesi, M. M., and Borghi, A. M. (2025b). Abstractness impacts conversational dynamics. Cognition 258:106084. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106084
Mellem, M. S., Jasmin, K. M., Peng, C., and Martin, A. (2016). Sentence processing in anterior superior temporal cortex shows a social-emotional bias. Neuropsychologia 89, 217–224. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.06.019
Minagawa, Y., Xu, M., and Morimoto, S. (2018). Toward interactive social neuroscience: Neuroimaging real-world interactions in various populations. Jpn. Psychol. Res. 60, 196–224. doi: 10.1111/jpr.12207
Montague, P. R., Berns, G. S., Cohen, J. D., McClure, S. M., Pagnoni, G., Dhamala, M., et al. (2002). Hyperscanning: simultaneous fMRI during linked social interactions. Neuroimage 16, 1159–1164. doi: 10.1006/nimg.2002.1150
Montefinese, M. (2019). Semantic representation of abstract and concrete words: a minireview of neural evidence. J. Neurophysiol. 121, 1585–1587. doi: 10.1152/jn.00065.2019
Müller, V., and Lindenberger, U. (2023). Intra- and interbrain synchrony and hyperbrain network dynamics of a guitarist quartet and its audience during a concert. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1523, 74–90. doi: 10.1111/nyas.14987
Murphy, G. (2002). The Big Book of Concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. doi: 10.7551/mitpress/1602.001.0001
Noppeney, U., and Price, C. J. (2004). Retrieval of abstract semantics. Neuroimage 22, 164–170. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.12.010
Novembre, G., and Iannetti, G. (2021). Hyperscanning alone cannot prove causality. Multibrain stimulation can. Trends Cogn. Sci. 25, 96–99. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2020.11.003
Paivio, A. (1990). “Dual coding theory,” in Mental Representations: A Dual Coding Approach, Oxford Psychology Series, ed. A. Paivio (New York, NY: Oxford University Press), 57–90. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195066661.003.0004
Pan, Y., and Cheng, X. (2020). Two-person approaches to studying social interaction in psychiatry: Uses and clinical relevance. Front. Psychiatry 11:301. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00301
Pan, Y., Dikker, S., Goldstein, P., Zhu, Y., Yang, C., and Hu, Y. (2020). Instructor-learner brain coupling discriminates between instructional approaches and predicts learning. Neuroimage 211:116657. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2020.116657
Pan, Y., Novembre, G., Song, B., Li, X., and Hu, Y. (2018). Interpersonal synchronization of inferior frontal cortices tracks social interactive learning of a song. Neuroimage 183, 280–290. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2018.08.005
Pérez, A., Carreiras, M., and Duñabeitia, J. A. (2017). Brain-to-brain entrainment: EEG interbrain synchronization while speaking and listening. Sci. Rep. 7:4190. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-04464-4
Pérez, A., Dumas, G., Karadag, M., and Duñabeitia, J. A. (2019). Differential brain-to-brain entrainment while speaking and listening in native and foreign languages. Cortex 111, 303–315. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2018.11.026
Ponari, M., Norbury, C. F., and Vigliocco, G. (2018). Acquisition of abstract concepts is influenced by emotional valence. Dev. Sci. 21:e12549. doi: 10.1111/desc.12549
Redcay, E., and Schilbach, L. (2019). Using second-person neuroscience to elucidate the mechanisms of social interaction. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 20, 495–505. doi: 10.1038/s41583-019-0179-4
Reilly, J., Shain, C., Borghesani, V., Kuhnke, P., Vigliocco, G., Peelle, J. E., et al. (2025). What we mean when we say semantic: Toward a multidisciplinary semantic glossary. Psychon. Bull. Rev. 32, 243–280. doi: 10.3758/s13423-024-02556-7
Schilbach, L., Timmermans, B., Reddy, V., Costall, A., Bente, G., Schlicht, T., et al. (2013). Toward a second-person neuroscience. Behav. Brain Sci. 36, 393–414. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X12000660
Schwanenflugel, P. J. (1991). “Why are abstract concepts hard to understand?,” in The Psychology of Word Meanings, ed. P. J. Schwanenflugel (Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc), 223–250.
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Akin, C., and Luh, W. (1992). Context availability and the recall of abstract and concrete words. Mem. Cogn. 20, 96–104. doi: 10.3758/BF03208259
Sun, B., Xiao, W., Feng, X., Shao, Y., Zhang, W., and Li, W. (2020). Behavioral and brain synchronization differences between expert and novice teachers when collaborating with students. Brain Cogn. 139:105513. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2019.105513
Tan, S. J., Wong, J. N., and Teo, W. P. (2023). Is neuroimaging ready for the classroom? A systematic review of hyperscanning studies in learning. Neuroimage 281:120367. /j.neuroimage.2023.120367 doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2023.120367
Vigliocco, G., Convertino, L., De Felice, S., Gregorians, L., Kewenig, V., Mueller, M. A., et al. (2024). Ecological brain: reframing the study of human behaviour and cognition. R. Soc. Open Sci. 11:240762. doi: 10.1098/rsos.240762
Villani, C., Lugli, L., Liuzza, M. T., and Borghi, A. M. (2019). Varieties of abstract concepts and their multiple dimensions. Lang. Cogn. 11, 403–430. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2019.23
Villani, C., Lugli, L., Liuzza, M. T., Nicoletti, R., and Borghi, A. M. (2021). Sensorimotor and interoceptive dimensions in concrete and abstract concepts. J. Mem. Lang. 116, 104–173. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2020.104173
Villani, C., Orsoni, M., Lugli, L., Benassi, M., and Borghi, A. M. (2022). Abstract and concrete concepts in conversation. Sci. Rep. 12:17572. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-20785-5
Visser, M., and Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2011). Differential contributions of bilateral ventral anterior temporal lobe and left anterior superior temporal gyrus to semantic processes. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 3121–3131. doi: 10.1162/jocn_a_00007
Wang, J., Conder, J. A., Blitzer, D. N., and Shinkareva, S. V. (2010). Neural representation of abstract and concrete concepts: A meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Hum. Brain Mapp. 31, 1459–1468. doi: 10.1002/hbm.20950
Wang, X., Wu, W., Ling, Z., Xu, Y., Fang, Y., Wang, X., et al. (2018). Organizational principles of abstract words in the human brain. Cereb. Cortex 28, 4305–4318. doi: 10.1093/cercor/bhx283
Wauters, L. N., Telling, A. E. J. M., Van Bon, W. H. J., and Van Haaften, A. W. (2003). Mode of acquisition of word meanings: the viability of a theoretical construct. App. Psycholinguist 24, 385–406. doi: 10.1017/S0142716403000201
Zamm, A., Loehr, J. D., Vesper, C., Konvalinka, I., Kappel, S. L., Heggli, O. A., et al. (2024). A practical guide to EEG hyperscanning in joint action research: from motivation to implementation. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 19:nsae026. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsae026
Zhang, Y., Meng, T., Hou, Y., Pan, Y., and Hu, Y. (2018). Interpersonal brain synchronization associated with working alliance during psychological counseling. Psychiatry Res. Neuroimaging 282, 103–109. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2018.09.007
Zheng, L., Chen, C., Liu, W., Long, Y., Zhao, H., Bai, X., et al. (2018). Enhancement of teaching outcome through neural prediction of the students' knowledge state. Hum. Brain Mapp. 39, 3046–3057. doi: 10.1002/hbm.24059
Zheng, L., Liu, W., Long, Y., Zhai, Y., Zhao, H., Bai, X., et al. (2020). Affiliative bonding between teachers and students through interpersonal synchronisation in brain activity. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 15, 97–109. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsaa016
Zhu, Y., Leong, V., Hou, Y., Zhang, D., Pan, Y., and Hu, Y. (2022). Instructor-learner neural synchronization during elaborated feedback predicts learning transfer. J. Educ. Psychol. 114:1427. doi: 10.1037/edu0000707
Keywords: abstractness, social interaction, hyperscanning, inter-brain synchronization, second-person neuroscience, learning, free conversations, naturalistic settings
Citation: Falcinelli I, Fini C and Borghi AM (2025) Abstractness and social interaction through a new lens: the potentialities of hyperscanning in naturalistic settings. Front. Neurosci. 19:1724845. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2025.1724845
Received: 14 October 2025; Revised: 21 November 2025;
Accepted: 24 November 2025; Published: 05 December 2025.
Edited by:
Maria Arioli, University of Bergamo, ItalyReviewed by:
Eva Balgova, Aberystwyth University, United KingdomCopyright © 2025 Falcinelli, Fini and Borghi. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Ilenia Falcinelli, aWxlbmlhLmZhbGNpbmVsbGlAdW5pcm9tYTEuaXQ=
†ORCID: Ilenia Falcinelli orcid.org/0000-0002-7692-5881
Chiara Fini orcid.org/0000-0002-9939-4745
Anna M. Borghi orcid.org/0000-0001-9455-8408