Expansion of space for visuotactile interaction during visually induced self-motion

Comparison of peripersonal space in front and rear spaces

The space immediately around the body, referred to as the peripersonal space (PPS), plays a crucial role in interactions with external objects and in avoiding unsafe situations. This study aimed to investigate whether the size of the PPS changes depending on direction, with a particular focus on the disparity between the front and rear spaces. A vibrotactile stimulus was presented to measure PPS while a task-irrelevant auditory stimulus (probe) approached the participant. In addition, to evaluate the effect of the probe, a baseline condition was used in which only tactile stimuli were presented. The results showed that the auditory facilitation effect of the tactile stimulus was greater in the rear condition than in the front condition. Conversely, the performance on tasks related to auditory distance perception and sound speed estimation did not differ between the two directions, indicating that the difference in the auditory facilitation effect between directions cannot be explained by these factors. These findings indicate that the strength of audio-tactile integration is greater in the rear space compared to the front space, suggesting that the representation of the PPS differed between the front and rear spaces.

Visual self-motion information contributes to passable width perception during a bike riding situation

Previous studies have shown that space perception around the body is altered by self-motion, and that several self-motion cues from different modalities, including vision, proprioception, the vestibular system, and the motor system (motor commands) contribute to it. However, studies on how online self-motion information affects the perception of a passable width of a narrow aperture is largely overlooked by existing literature. Therefore, this study investigated this issue during virtual bike riding. Participants observed a narrow doorway aperture with varied widths in a virtual environment through a head-mounted display while riding a stationary bike. Visual self-motion information was presented by optical flow, while motor commands and proprioceptive feedback (non-visual information) was provided by having participants pedal the bike. The participants were then required to judge whether the presented aperture was passable. Experiment 1, where both visual and non-visual cues were provided, confirmed that the perceived passable width significantly increased with increasing self-motion speed, as previously shown during walking. Experiment 2, where self-motion cues were manipulated, showed that expansion of the perceived passable width was mainly induced by visual self-motion information. These results suggest that online self-motion information can affect passable width perception during bike riding and that visual self-motion information plays a significant role in this perception.

Contribution of motor and proprioceptive information to visuotactile interaction in peripersonal space during bike riding

The space immediately around the body, known as the peripersonal space (PPS), plays an important role in interactions with the environment. Specific representations are reported to be constructed in the brain. PPS expansion reportedly occurs during whole-body self-motions, such as walking; however, little is known regarding how dynamic cues in proprioceptive/motor information contribute to such phenomena. Thus, we investigated this issue using a pedaling bike situation. We defined PPS as the maximum distance at which a visual probe facilitated tactile detection at the chest. Experiment 1 compared two conditions where participants did or did not pedal the bike at a constant speed while observing an optic flow that simulated forward self-motion (pedaling and no pedaling). Experiment 2 investigated the effect of pedal resistances (high and low) while presenting the same optic flow as in Experiment 1. The results revealed that the reaction time (RT) difference (probe RT - baseline RT) was larger for the pedaling than for the no-pedaling condition. However, pedal resistance differences hardly affected the visuotactile interaction, although the participants clearly experienced differences in force. These results suggest that proprioceptive/motor cues can contribute to the modulation of PPS representation, but dynamic information included in these cues may have little influence.