Theories of embodied cognition propose that perception is shaped by sensory stimuli and by the actions of the organism. Following sensorimotor contingency theory, the mastery of lawful relations between own behavior and resulting changes in sensory signals, called sensorimotor contingencies, is constitutive of conscious perception. Sensorimotor contingency theory predicts that, after training, knowledge relating to new sensorimotor contingencies develops, leading to changes in the activation of sensorimotor systems, and concomitant changes in perception. In the present study, we spell out this hypothesis in detail and investigate whether it is possible to learn new sensorimotor contingencies by sensory augmentation. Specifically, we designed an fMRI compatible sensory augmentation device, the feelSpace belt, which gives orientation information about the direction of magnetic north via vibrotactile stimulation on the waist of participants. In a longitudinal study, participants trained with this belt for seven weeks in natural environment. Our EEG results indicate that training with the belt leads to changes in sleep architecture early in the training phase, compatible with the consolidation of procedural learning as well as increased sensorimotor processing and motor programming. The fMRI results suggest that training entails activity in sensory as well as higher motor centers and brain areas known to be involved in navigation. These neural changes are accompanied with changes in how space and the belt signal are perceived, as well as with increased trust in navigational ability. Thus, our data on physiological processes and subjective experiences are compatible with the hypothesis that new sensorimotor contingencies can be acquired using sensory augmentation.

When reaching for an earth-fixed object during self-rotation, the motor system should appropriately integrate vestibular signals and sensory predictions to compensate for the intervening motion and its induced inertial forces. While it is well established that this integration occurs rapidly, it is unknown whether vestibular feedback is specifically processed dependent on the behavioral goal. Here, we studied whether vestibular signals evoke fixed responses with the aim to preserve the hand trajectory in space or are processed more flexibly, correcting trajectories only in task-relevant spatial dimensions. We used galvanic vestibular stimulation to perturb reaching movements toward a narrow or a wide target. Results show that the same vestibular stimulation led to smaller trajectory corrections to the wide than the narrow target. We interpret this reduced compensation as a task-dependent modulation of vestibular feedback responses, tuned to minimally intervene with the task-irrelevant dimension of the reach. These task-dependent vestibular feedback corrections are in accordance with a central prediction of optimal feedback control theory and mirror the sophistication seen in feedback responses to mechanical and visual perturbations of the upper limb. Correcting limb movements for external perturbations is a hallmark of flexible sensorimotor behavior. While visual and mechanical perturbations are corrected in a task-dependent manner, it is unclear whether a vestibular perturbation, naturally arising when the body moves, is selectively processed in reach control. We show, using galvanic vestibular stimulation, that reach corrections to vestibular perturbations are task dependent, consistent with a prediction of optimal feedback control theory.

In contrast to its well-established role in alleviating skeleto-motor symptoms in Parkinson's disease, little is known about the impact of deep brain stimulation (DBS) of the subthalamic nucleus (STN) on oculomotor control and attention. Eye-tracking data of 17 patients with left-hemibody symptom onset was compared with 17 age-matched control subjects. Free-viewing of natural images was assessed without stimulation as baseline and during bilateral DBS. To examine the involvement of ventral STN territories in oculomotion and spatial attention, we employed unilateral stimulation via the left and right ventralmost contacts respectively. When DBS was off, patients showed shorter saccades and a rightward viewing bias compared with controls. Bilateral stimulation in therapeutic settings improved saccadic hypometria but not the visuospatial bias. At a group level, unilateral ventral stimulation yielded no consistent effects. However, the evaluation of electrode position within normalized MNI coordinate space revealed that the extent of early exploration bias correlated with the precise stimulation site within the left subthalamic area. These results suggest that oculomotor impairments “but not higher-level exploration patterns” are effectively ameliorable by DBS in therapeutic settings. Our findings highlight the relevance of the STN topography in selecting contacts for chronic stimulation especially upon appearance of visuospatial attention deficits.

Feedback corrections in reaching have been shown to be task‐dependent for proprioceptive, visual and vestibular perturbations, in line with predictions from optimal feedback control theory. Mechanical perturbations have been used to elicit proprioceptive errors, but have the drawback to actively alter the limb's trajectory, making it nontrivial to dissociate the subject's compensatory response from the perturbation itself. In contrast, muscle vibration provides an alternative tool to perturb the muscle afferents without changing the hands trajectory, inducing only changes in the estimated, but not the actual, limb position and velocity. Here, we investigate whether upper‐arm muscle vibration is sufficient to evoke task‐dependent feedback corrections during goal‐directed reaching to a narrow versus a wide target. Our main result is that for vibration of biceps and triceps, compensatory responses were down‐regulated for the wide compared to the narrow target. The earliest detectable difference between these target‐specific corrections is at about 100 ms, likely reflecting a task‐dependent feedback control policy rather than a voluntary response.

No abstract

No abstract

The motor system corrects rapidly, but selectively, for perturbations to ongoing reaching movements, depending on the constraints of the task. To account for such sophistication, it has been postulated that corrections are based on an estimated limb state that integrates all sensory changes caused by the perturbation, taking into account their processing delays.Here we asked if information from different sensory modalities is integrated immediately, or processed separately in the early phase of a response. We perturbed the estimated state of the limb with both uni-modal and bi-modal visual and proprioceptive perturbations without changing the actual limb state. For visual perturbations, a cursor representing the hand was shifted to the left or the right relative to the true hand location. For proprioceptive perturbations, the biceps or triceps muscles were vibrated, which induced illusory limb state changes to the right or the left. In the bimodal condition the perturbations to vision and proprioception were either congruent or incongruent in their directions.Response latencies show that it takes ~100 ms longer to respond to unimodal visual perturbations than to unimodal proprioceptive perturbations. Responses to bimodal perturbations show that it takes an additional ~100 ms beyond the response to unimodal visual perturbations for inter-modal consistency to impact the response. These results suggest that visual and proprioceptive signals are initially processed separately for state estimation and only combined at the level of the limb's motor output, instead of being immediately integrated into a single state estimate of the limb.