Confusing the mind by crossing the hands

Shore, David I.; Spry, Emily; Spence, Charles

doi:10.1016/s0926-6410(02)00070-8

Cited by 273 publications

(376 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

333

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Intriguingly, this contrasts with previous research that has shown that the addition of non-spatial information, such as when the stimuli differ in the identity of the stimulated body part, has little if any effect on the deficit (Schicke & Roder, 2006;Shore et al, 2002). For instance, TOJ crossing effects are comparable when same or different fingers of each hand are stimulated (Shore et al, 2002), or even when stimuli are applied to one hand and to one foot, while they are crossed with each other (Schicke & Roder, 2006).…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

“…We expected that elevating one of the hands would reduce the crossed-hands deficit. A repeated measures ANOVA with the within-subject factors of Posture and Alignment showed that the JND was larger when the arms were crossed as compared to uncrossed (main effect of posture: F(1, 15) = 11.93, p=0.004, ηp 2 = 0.44; Figure 1, left panel), replicating a well-established crossed-hands deficit (Shore et al, 2002;Yamamoto & Kitazawa, 2001). Moreover, the crossed-hands deficit (difference in performance in the two postures) was reduced by a factor of two in the misaligned as compared to the aligned condition The results of Experiment 1 show that the crossed-hands deficit is reduced -but not eliminatedwhen an extra spatial cue is available, in this case, the location of touch in the vertical axis.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In this posture, a touch on the right hand (in skin-based coordinates), is located in left space, creating an incongruence between reference frames in the right-left dimension (Shore et al, 2002;Yamamoto & Kitazawa, 2001; for a review see Heed, Buchholz, Engel, & Röder, 2015). A well-known consequence of this conflicting information is the impairment in the ability to report the order of two stimuli, one applied to each hand, when hands are crossed (Heed & Azañón, 2014;Shore et al, 2002;Yamamoto & Kitazawa, 2001). In such instances, the order of two stimuli might be correctly computed, but it is inaccurately reported because of the incorrect localization of the stimuli in space (Badde, Heed, & Röder, 2016;Overvliet, Azañón, & Soto-Faraco, 2011;Roberts & Humphreys, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A three-dimensional spatial characterization of the crossed-hands deficit

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To perceive the location of touch in space, we integrate information about skin-location with information about the location of that body part in space. Most research investigating this process of tactile spatial remapping has used the so-called crossed-hands deficit, in which the ability to judge the temporal order of touches on the two hands is impaired when the arms are crossed. This posture induces a conflict between skin-based and tactile external spatial representations, specifically in the left-right dimension. Thus, it is unknown whether touch is affected by posture when spatial relations other than the right-left dimension are available. Here, we tested the extent to which the crossed-hands deficit is a measure of tactile remapping, reflecting tactile encoding in continuous three-dimensional space. Participants judged the temporal order of tactile stimuli presented to crossed and uncrossed hands. The arms were placed at different elevations (up-down dimension; Experiments 1 and 2), or at different distances from the body in the depth plane (nearfar dimension; Experiment 3). The crossed-hands deficit was reduced when other sources of spatial information, orthogonal to the left-right dimension, were available. Nonetheless, the deficit persisted in all conditions, even when processing of non-conflicting information was enough to solve the task. Together, these results demonstrate that the processing underlying the crossed-hands deficit is related to the encoding of tactile localization in three-dimensional space, rather than related uniquely to the cost of processing information in the right-left dimension. Furthermore, the persistence of the crossing effect provides evidence for automatic integration of all available information, regardless of whether or not it is conflicting.3

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 88%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 64%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A three-dimensional spatial characterization of the crossed-hands deficit

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If this 'general impairment' hypothesis were true, then crossing the hands should impair both visual and vibrotactile discrimination performance equally, for example when tested under unimodal discrimination conditions (though see [16], for contradictory evidence). Alternatively, one might hypothesise that, since crossing the hands affects the spatial position of the somatosensory receptors, but not those of the visual receptors, then somatosensory discrimination should be impaired to a greater extent than visual discrimination [23]. This is the 'somatosensory impairment' hypothesis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multisensory interactions follow the hands across the midline: Evidence from a non-spatial visual–tactile congruency task

et al. 2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Crossing the hands over, whether across the body midline or with respect to each other, leads to measurable changes in spatial compatibility, spatial attention, and frequently to a general decrement in discrimination performance for tactile stimuli. The majority of multisensory crossed hands effects, however, have been demonstrated with explicit or implicit spatial discrimination tasks, raising the question of whether non-spatial discrimination tasks also show spatial effects when the hands are crossed. We designed a novel, non-spatial tactile discrimination task to address this issue. Participants made speeded discriminations of single-versus double-pulse vibrotactile targets, while trying to ignore simultaneous visual distractor stimuli, in both hands uncrossed, and hands crossed postures. Tactile discrimination performance was significantly affected by the visual distractors (demonstrating a significant crossmodal congruency effect), and was affected most by visual distractors in the same external location as the tactile target (i.e., spatial modulation), regardless of the posture (uncrossed or crossed) of the hands (i.e., spatial 'remapping' of visual-tactile interactions). Finally, crossing the hands led to a general performance decrement with visual distractors, but not in a control task with unimodal visual or tactile judgements. These results demonstrate, for the first time, significant spatial and postural modulations of crossmodal congruency effects in a non-spatial discrimination task.

show abstract

Visual and Proprioceptive Influences on Tactile Spatial Processing in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children with autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) often exhibit altered representations of the external world. Consistently, when localizing touch, children with ASDs were less influenced than their peers by changes of the stimulated limb's location in external space [Wada et al., Scientific Reports 2015, 4(1), 5985]. However, given the protracted development of an external‐spatial dominance in tactile processing in typically developing children, this difference might reflect a developmental delay rather than a set suppression of external space in ASDs. Here, adults with ASDs and matched control‐participants completed (a) the tactile temporal order judgment (TOJ) task previously used to test external‐spatial representation of touch in children with ASDs and (b) a tactile‐visual cross‐modal congruency (CC) task which assesses benefits of task‐irrelevant visual stimuli on tactile localization in external space. In both experiments, participants localized tactile stimuli to the fingers of each hand, while holding their hands either crossed or uncrossed. Performance differences between hand postures reflect the influence of external‐spatial codes. In both groups, tactile TOJ‐performance markedly decreased when participants crossed their hands and CC‐effects were especially large if the visual stimulus was presented at the same side of external space as the task‐relevant touch. The absence of group differences was statistically confirmed using Bayesian statistical modeling: adults with ASDs weighted external‐spatial codes comparable to typically developed adults during tactile and visual‐tactile spatio‐temporal tasks. Thus, atypicalities in the spatial coding of touch for children with ASDs appear to reflect a developmental delay rather than a stable characteristic of ASD. Autism Res 2019, 12: 1745–1757. © 2019 International Society for Autism Research, Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Lay Summary A touched limb's location can be described twofold, with respect to the body (right hand) or the external world (right side). Children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) reportedly rely less than their peers on the external world. Here, adults with and without ASDs completed two tactile localization tasks. Both groups relied to the same degree on external world locations. This opens the possibility that the tendency to relate touch to the external world is typical in individuals with ASDs but emerges with a delay.

show abstract

Confusing the mind by crossing the hands

Cited by 273 publications

References 60 publications

A three-dimensional spatial characterization of the crossed-hands deficit

A three-dimensional spatial characterization of the crossed-hands deficit

Multisensory interactions follow the hands across the midline: Evidence from a non-spatial visual–tactile congruency task

Visual and Proprioceptive Influences on Tactile Spatial Processing in Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorders

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About