Remapping tactile events from skin to external space is an essential process for human behaviour. It allows us to refer tactile sensations to their actual externally based location, by combining anatomically based somatosensory information with proprioceptive information about the current body posture. We examined the time course of tactile remapping by recording speeded saccadic responses to somatosensory stimuli delivered to the hands. We conducted two experiments in which arm posture varied (crossed or uncrossed), so that anatomical and external frames of reference were either put in spatial conflict or were aligned. The data showed that saccade onset latencies in the crossed hands conditions were slower than in the uncrossed hands condition, suggesting that, in the crossed hands condition, remapping had to be completed before a correct saccade could be executed. Saccades to tactile stimuli when the hands were crossed were sometimes initiated to the wrong direction and then corrected in-flight, resulting in a turn-around saccade. These turn-around saccades were more likely to occur in short-latency responses, compared to onset latencies of saccades that went straight to target. The latter suggests that participants were postponing their saccade until the time the tactile event was represented according to the current body posture. We propose that the difference between saccade onset latencies of crossed and uncrossed hand postures, and between the onset of a turn-around saccade and a straight saccade in the crossed hand posture, reveal the timing of tactile spatial remapping.

No abstract

We propose a model that distinguishes between parallel and serial search in haptics. To test this model, participants performed three haptic search experiments in which a target and distractors were presented to their fingertips. The participants indicated a target's presence by lifting the corresponding finger, or its absence by lifting all fingers. In one experiment, the target was a cross and the distractors were circles. In another, the target was a vertical line and the distractors were horizontal lines. In both cases, we found a serial search pattern. In a final experiment, the target was a horizontal line and the distractors were surfaces without any contours. In this case, we found a parallel search pattern. We conclude that the model can describe our data very well.

The brain rapidly adapts reaching movements to changing circumstances by using visual feedback about errors. Providing reward in addition to error feedback facilitates the adaptation but the underlying mechanism is unknown. Here, we investigate whether the proportion of trials rewarded (the ‘reward abundance’) influences how much participants adapt to their errors. We used a 3D multi-target pointing task in which reward alone is insufficient for motor adaptation. Participants (N = 423) performed the pointing task with feedback based on a shifted hand-position. On a proportion of trials we gave them rewarding feedback that their hand hit the target. Half of the participants only received this reward feedback. The other half also received feedback about endpoint errors. In different groups, we varied the proportion of trials that was rewarded. As expected, participants who received feedback about their errors did adapt, but participants who only received reward-feedback did not. Critically, participants who received abundant rewards adapted less to their errors than participants who received less reward. Thus, reward abundance negatively influences how much participants learn from their errors. Probably participants used a mechanism that relied more on the reward feedback when the reward was abundant. Because participants could not adapt to the reward, this interfered with adaptation to errors.