Contribution of Visual Motion Cues from a Held Tool to Kinesthesia

Body ownership and kinaesthetic illusions: Dissociated bodily experiences for distinct levels of body consciousness?

Seeing an embodied humanoid avatar move its arms can induce in the observer the illusion that its own (static) arms are moving accordingly, the kinematic signals emanating from this avatar thus being considered like those from the biological body. Here, we investigated the causal relationship between these kinaesthetic illusions and the illusion of body ownership, manipulated through visuomotor synchronisation. The results of two experiments revealed that the sense of body ownership over an avatar seen from a first-person perspective was intimately linked to visuomotor synchrony. This was not the case for kinaesthetic illusions indicating that when superimposed on the biological body, the avatar is inevitably treated at the sensorimotor level as one's own body, whether consciously considered as such or not. The question of whether these two bodily experiences (body ownership and kinaesthetic illusion) are underpinned by distinct representations, the body image, and the body schema, is discussed.

Multisensory integration of visual cues from first- to third-person perspective avatars in the perception of self-motion

In the perception of self-motion, visual cues originating from an embodied humanoid avatar seen from a first-person perspective (1^st-PP) are processed in the same way as those originating from a person's own body. Here, we sought to determine whether the user's and avatar's bodies in virtual reality have to be colocalized for this visual integration. In Experiment 1, participants saw a whole-body avatar in a virtual mirror facing them. The mirror perspective could be supplemented with a fully visible 1^st-PP avatar or a suggested one (with the arms hidden by a virtual board). In Experiment 2, the avatar was viewed from the mirror perspective or a third-person perspective (3^rd-PP) rotated 90° left or right. During an initial embodiment phase in both experiments, the avatar's forearms faithfully reproduced the participant's real movements. Next, kinaesthetic illusions were induced on the static right arm from the vision of passive displacements of the avatar's arms enhanced by passive displacement of the participant's left arm. Results showed that this manipulation elicited kinaesthetic illusions regardless of the avatar's perspective in Experiments 1 and 2. However, illusions were more likely to occur when the mirror perspective was supplemented with the view of the 1st-PP avatar's body than with the mirror perspective only (Experiment 1), just as they are more likely to occur in the latter condition than with the 3^rd-PP (Experiment 2). Our results show that colocalization of the user's and avatar's bodies is an important, but not essential, factor in visual integration for self-motion perception.

Functional properties of extended body representations in the context of kinesthesia

A person's internal representation of his/her body is not fixed. It can be substantially modified by neurological injuries and can also be extended (in healthy participants) to incorporate objects that have a corporeal appearance (such as fake body segments, e.g. a rubber hand), virtual whole bodies (e.g. avatars), and even objects that do not have a corporeal appearance (e.g. tools). Here, we report data from patients and healthy participants that emphasize the flexible nature of body representation and question the extent to which incorporated objects have the same functional properties as biological body parts. Our data shed new light by highlighting the involvement of visual motion information from incorporated objects (rubber hands, full body avatars and hand-held tools) in the perception of one's own movement (kinesthesia). On the basis of these findings, we argue that incorporated objects can be treated as body parts, especially when kinesthesia is involved.

Ipsilateral vs Contralateral Presentation of Familiarization Trials in a Lower-Limb Proprioception Test

We examined the effect of pretest familiarization with ipsilateral or contralateral limbs on the performance in a proprioception test conducted afterwards. Sixty adults were randomly assigned to six different familiarization-session patterns. Ankle proprioception was tested using active movement extent discrimination assessment. The results reflected a beneficial effect of familiarization session on performance in the subsequent proprioception test (ES = 0.777). However, no significant difference was found between proprioceptive acuity scores when familiarization and test happened with either ipsilateral or contralateral limbs (ES= 0.361), or between the tested left and right foot no matter which side was familiarized (ES = 0.343). These results suggest that proprioceptive information from the familiarization session facilitates the subsequent proprioception test and is equally available to both hemispheres without loss of quality.

Tool Use Modulates Somatosensory Cortical Processing in Humans

Tool use leads to plastic changes in sensorimotor body representations underlying tactile perception. The neural correlates of this tool-induced plasticity in humans have not been adequately characterized. This study used ERPs to investigate the stage of sensory processing modulated by tool use. Somatosensory evoked potentials, elicited by median nerve stimulation, were recorded before and after two forms of object interaction: tool use and hand use. Compared with baseline, tool use-but not use of the hand alone-modulated the amplitude of the P100. The P100 is a mid-latency component that indexes the construction of multisensory models of the body and has generators in secondary somatosensory and posterior parietal cortices. These results mark one of the first demonstrations of the neural correlates of tool-induced plasticity in humans and suggest that tool use modulates relatively late stages of somatosensory processing outside primary somatosensory cortex. This finding is consistent with what has been observed in tool-trained monkeys and suggests that the mechanisms underlying tool-induced plasticity have been preserved across primate evolution.

Fake hand in movement: Visual motion cues from the rubber hand are processed for kinesthesia

The feeling that a fake (e.g. rubber) hand belongs to a person's own body can be elicited by synchronously stroking the fake hand and the real hand, with the latter hidden from view. Here, we sought to determine whether visual motion signals from that incorporated rubber hand would provide relevant cues for sensing movement (i.e. kinesthesia). After 180 s of visuo-tactile synchronous or asynchronous stroking, the fake hand was moved along the lateral or the sagittal axis. After synchronous stroking, movement of the rubber hand induced illusory movement of the static (real) hand in the same direction; the illusion was slightly more frequent and more intense when the fake hand was moved along the sagittal axis. We therefore conclude that visual signals of motion originating from the rubber hand are integrated for kinesthesia by the central nervous system just as visual signals from the real hand are.