The hidden hand is perceived closer to midline

Qureshi, Hassan G.; Butler, Annie A.; Kerr, Graham; Gandevia, Simon C.; Héroux, Martin E.

doi:10.1007/s00221-019-05546-7

Cited by 7 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, results from Experiment 2 reproduced those of the grasp→vision condition from Experiment 1. This overall stability is in line with anecdotal observations from our prior experiments (Butler et al, 2019;Héroux et al, 2018;Qureshi et al, 2019;Rana et al, 2020) and results from studies that considered the stability of cross-modal judgements in tasks that involve vision and whole arm pointing or reaching (Kuling et al, 2016;Wilson et al, 2010).…”

Section: The Stability Of High-level Proprioceptive Judgementssupporting

confidence: 88%

“…As highlighted by the present study, people have bespoke calibrations for the central transformations involved in cross‐modal perceptual judgements (Butler et al., 2019; Qureshi et al., 2019; Rana et al., 2020; Rincon‐Gonzalez et al., 2011). These personalised calibrations generate judgements that are proportional to, but not necessarily equal to, the actual width of grasped objects or viewed lines.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…However, there is another class of proprioceptive tasks, termed high‐level proprioception (Héroux et al., 2022b, 2022a), that involves perceptual judgements made across different frames of reference (e.g. Butler et al., 2019; Jastrow, 1886; Qureshi et al., 2019; Velay et al., 1989). For example, a person might be asked to select a point on a visual grid to report the location of their hidden hand (Ingram et al., 2019; Rana et al., 2020; Rincon‐Gonzalez et al., 2011; Tsay et al., 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While perceptual errors are relatively small and consistent in low‐level proprioceptive tasks (Brodie & Ross, 1984; Chan et al., 1990; Connolly & Jones, 1970; Djajadikarta et al., 2020; Gandevia et al., 1983; Hershberger & Misceo, 1996; Walsh et al., 2004; Wilson et al., 2010), they are larger and more variable in high‐level proprioceptive tasks (Connolly & Jones, 1970; Héroux et al., 2018; Kuling et al., 2017; Qureshi et al., 2019; Rana et al., 2020; Van Doren, 1995). For example, in one study, we asked 20 people to grasp a 6.5‐cm‐wide object and report its width by selecting from a series of horizontal lines of different lengths (Butler et al., 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

How we perceive the width of grasped objects: Insights into the central processes that govern proprioceptive judgements

Héroux,

Fisher,

Axelson

et al. 2024

The Journal of Physiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Low‐level proprioceptive judgements involve a single frame of reference, whereas high‐level proprioceptive judgements are made across different frames of reference. The present study systematically compared low‐level (graspgrasp) and high‐level (visiongrasp, graspvision) proprioceptive tasks, and quantified the consistency of graspvision and possible reciprocal nature of related high‐level proprioceptive tasks. Experiment 1 (n = 30) compared performance across visiongrasp, a graspvision and a graspgrasp tasks. Experiment 2 (n = 30) compared performance on the graspvision task between hands and over time. Participants were accurate (mean absolute error 0.27 cm [0.20 to 0.34]; mean [95% CI]) and precise ( = 0.95 [0.93 to 0.96]) for graspgrasp judgements, with a strong correlation between outcomes (r = −0.85 [−0.93 to −0.70]). Accuracy and precision decreased in the two high‐level tasks ( = 0.86 and 0.89; mean absolute error = 1.34 and 1.41 cm), with most participants overestimating perceived width for the visiongrasp task and underestimating it for graspvision task. There was minimal correlation between accuracy and precision for these two tasks. Converging evidence indicated performance was largely reciprocal (inverse) between the visiongrasp and graspvision tasks. Performance on the graspvision task was consistent between dominant and non‐dominant hands, and across repeated sessions a day or week apart. Overall, there are fundamental differences between low‐ and high‐level proprioceptive judgements that reflect fundamental differences in the cortical processes that underpin these perceptions. Moreover, the central transformations that govern high‐level proprioceptive judgements of grasp are personalised, stable and reciprocal for reciprocal tasks. imageKey points Low‐level proprioceptive judgements involve a single frame of reference (e.g. indicating the width of a grasped object by selecting from a series of objects of different width), whereas high‐level proprioceptive judgements are made across different frames of reference (e.g. indicating the width of a grasped object by selecting from a series of visible lines of different length). We highlight fundamental differences in the precision and accuracy of low‐ and high‐level proprioceptive judgements. We provide converging evidence that the neural transformations between frames of reference that govern high‐level proprioceptive judgements of grasp are personalised, stable and reciprocal for reciprocal tasks. This stability is likely key to precise judgements and accurate predictions in high‐level proprioception.

show abstract

Section: The Stability Of High-level Proprioceptive Judgementssupporting

confidence: 88%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 67%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

How we perceive the width of grasped objects: Insights into the central processes that govern proprioceptive judgements

Héroux,

Fisher,

Axelson

et al. 2024

The Journal of Physiology

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This enhanced processing of visual stimuli lying in the region proximal to the body midline has been confirmed with behavioural assessments [23], and has been linked to an optimization of the detection and avoidance of potential threats for the body while visually attending other regions in the surrounding space. Besides this, the proprioceptive encoding of the hand location was found to be misperceived closer to the body midline, with a bias that increases as the hand's true location moves away from it [24,25].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhanced efficiency in visually guided online motor control for actions redirected towards the body midline

Maselli

Ofek

Cohn

et al. 2022

Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reaching objects in a dynamic environment requires fast online corrections that compensate for sudden object shifts or postural changes. Previous studies revealed the key role of visually monitoring the hand-to-target distance throughout action execution. In the current study, we investigate how sensorimotor asymmetries associated with space perception, brain lateralization and biomechanical constraints, affect the efficiency of online corrections. Participants performed reaching actions in virtual reality, where the virtual hand was progressively displaced from the real hand to trigger online corrections, for which it was possible to control the total amount of the redirection and the region of space in which the action unfolded. The efficiency of online corrections and the degree of awareness of the ensuing motor corrections were taken as assessment variables. Results revealed more efficient visuo-motor corrections for actions redirected towards, rather than away from the body midline. The effect is independent on the reaching hand and the hemispace of action, making explanations associated with laterality effects and biomechanical constraints improbable. The result cannot either be accounted for by the visual processing advantage in the straight-ahead region. An explanation may be found in the finer sensorimotor representations characterizing the frontal space proximal to body, where a preference for visual processing has been documented, and where high-value functional actions, like fine manipulative skills, typically take place. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue ‘New approaches to 3D vision’.

show abstract