Dynamic expansion of alert responses to incoming painful stimuli following tool use

Action does not drive visual biases in peri-tool space

Observers experience visual biases in the area around handheld tools. These biases may occur when active use leads an observer to incorporate a tool into the body schema. However, the visual salience of a handheld tool may instead create an attentional prioritization that is not reliant on body-based representations. We investigated these competing explanations of near-tool visual biases in two experiments during which participants performed a target detection task. Targets could appear near or far from a tool positioned next to a display. In Experiment 1, participants showed facilitation in detecting targets that appeared near a simple handheld rake tool regardless of whether they first used the rake to retrieve objects, but participants who only viewed the tool without holding it were no faster to detect targets appearing near the rake than targets that appeared on the opposite side of the display. In a second experiment, participants who held a novel magnetic tool again showed a near-tool bias even when they refrained from using the tool. Taken together, these results suggest active use is unnecessary, but visual salience is not sufficient, to introduce visual biases in peri-tool space.

Emergence of sense of body ownership but not agency during virtual tool-use training is associated with an altered body schema

In this study we examined if training with a virtual tool in augmented reality (AR) affects the emergence of ownership and agency over the tool and whether this relates to changes in body schema (BS). 34 young adults learned controlling a virtual gripper to grasp a virtual object. In the visuo-tactile (VT) but not the vision-only (V) condition, vibro-tactile feedback was applied to the palm, thumb and index fingers through a CyberTouch II glove when the tool touched the object. Changes in the forearm BS were assessed with a tactile distance judgement task (TDJ) where participants judged distances between two tactile stimuli applied to their right forearm either in proximodistal or mediolateral orientation. Participants further rated their perceived ownership and agency after training. TDJ estimation errors were reduced after training for proximodistal orientations, suggesting that stimuli oriented along the arm axis were perceived as closer together. Higher ratings for ownership were associated with increasing performance level and more BS plasticity, i.e., stronger reduction in TDJ estimation error, and after training in the VT as compared to the V feedback condition, respectively. Agency over the tool was achieved independent of BS plasticity. We conclude that the emergence of a sense of ownership but not agency depends on performance level and the integration of the virtual tool into the arm representation.

Are tools truly incorporated as an extension of the body representation?: Assessing the evidence for tool embodiment

The predominant view on human tool-use suggests that an action-oriented body representation, the body schema, is altered to fit the tool being wielded, a phenomenon termed tool embodiment. While observations of perceptual change after tool-use purport to support this hypothesis, several issues undermine their validity in this context, discussed at length in this critical review. The primary measures used as indicators of tool embodiment each face unique challenges to their construct validity. Further, the perceptual changes taken as indicating extension of the body representation only appear to account for a fraction of the tool's size in any given experiment, and do not demonstrate the covariance with tool length that the embodiment hypothesis would predict. The expression of tool embodiment also appears limited to a narrow range of tool-use tasks, as deviations from a simple reaching paradigm can mollify or eliminate embodiment effects altogether. The shortcomings identified here generate important avenues for future research. Until the source of the kinematic and perceptual effects that have substantiated tool embodiment is disambiguated, the hypothesis that the body representation changes to fit tools during tool-use should not be favored over other possibilities such as the formation of separable internal tool models, which seem to offer a more complete account of human tool-use behaviors. Indeed, studies of motor learning have observed analogous perceptual changes as aftereffects to adaptation despite the absence of handheld tool-use, offering a compelling alternative explanation, though more work is needed to confirm this possibility.

Threat Detection in Nearby Space Mobilizes Human Ventral Premotor Cortex, Intraparietal Sulcus, and Amygdala

In the monkey brain, the precentral gyrus and ventral intraparietal area are two interconnected brain regions that form a system for detecting and responding to events in nearby “peripersonal” space (PPS), with threat detection as one of its major functions. Behavioral studies point toward a similar defensive function of PPS in humans. Here, our aim was to find support for this hypothesis by investigating if homolog regions in the human brain respond more strongly to approaching threatening stimuli. During fMRI scanning, naturalistic social stimuli were presented in a 3D virtual environment. Our results showed that the ventral premotor cortex and intraparietal sulcus responded more strongly to threatening stimuli entering PPS. Moreover, we found evidence for the involvement of the amygdala and anterior insula in processing threats. We propose that the defensive function of PPS may be supported by a subcortical circuit that sends information about the relevance of the stimulus to the premotor cortex and intraparietal sulcus, where action preparation is facilitated when necessary.

Body-Space Interactions: Same Spatial Encoding but Different Influence of Valence for Reaching and Defensive Purposes

The space around our body, the so-called peripersonal space, is where interactions with nearby objects may occur. "Defensive space" and "Reaching space", respectively, refer to two opposite poles of interaction between our body and the external environment: protecting the body and performing a goal-directed action. Here, we hypothesized that mechanisms underlying these two action spaces are differentially modulated by the valence of visual stimuli, as stimuli with negative valence are more likely to activate protective actions whereas stimuli with positive valence may activate approaching actions. To test whether such distinction in cognitive/evaluative processing exists between Reaching and Defensive spaces, we measured behavioral responses as well as neural activations over sensorimotor cortex using EEG while participants performed several tasks designed to tap into mechanisms underlying either Defensive (e.g., respond to touch) or Reaching space (e.g., estimate whether object is within reaching distance). During each task, pictures of objects with either positive or negative valence were presented at different distances from the participants' body. We found that Defensive space was smaller for positively compared with negatively valenced visual stimuli. Furthermore, sensorimotor cortex activation (reflected in modulation of beta power) during tactile processing was enhanced when coupled with negatively rather than positively valenced visual stimuli regarding Defensive space. On the contrary, both the EEG and behavioral measures capturing the mechanisms underlying Reaching space did not reveal any modulation by valence. Thus, although valence encoding had differential effects on Reaching and Defensive spaces, the distance of the visual stimulus modulated behavioral measures as well as activity over sensorimotor cortex (reflected in modulations of mu power) in a similar way for both types of spaces. Our results are compatible with the idea that Reaching and Defensive spaces involve the same distance-dependent neural representations of sensory input, whereas task goals and stimulus valence (i.e., contextual information) are implemented at a later processing stage and exert an influence on motor output rather than sensory/space encoding.

Increasing self-other bodily overlap increases sensorimotor resonance to others' pain

Empathy for another person’s pain and feeling pain oneself seem to be accompanied by similar or shared neural responses. Such shared responses could be achieved by mapping the bodily states of others onto our own bodily representations. We investigated whether sensorimotor neural responses to the pain of others are increased when experimentally reducing perceived bodily distinction between the self and the other. Healthy adult participants watched video clips of the hands of ethnic ingroup or outgroup members being painfully penetrated by a needle syringe or touched by a cotton swab. Manipulating the video presentation to create a visuospatial overlap between the observer’s and the target’s hand increased the perceived bodily self-attribution of the target’s hand. For both ingroup and outgroup targets, this resulted in increased neural responses to the painful injections (compared with nonpainful contacts), as indexed by desynchronizations of central mu and beta scalp rhythms recorded using electroencephalography. Furthermore, these empathy-related neural activations were stronger in participants who reported stronger bodily self-attribution of the other person’s hand. Our findings provide further evidence that empathy for pain engages sensorimotor resonance mechanisms. They also indicate that reducing bodily self-other distinction may increase such resonance for ingroup as well as outgroup targets.

The Peripersonal Space in a social world

The PeriPersonal Space (PPS) has been defined as the space surrounding the body, where physical interactions with elements of the environment take place. As our world is social in nature, recent evidence revealed the complex modulation of social factors onto PPS representation. In light of the growing interest in the field, in this review we take a close look at the experimental approaches undertaken to assess the impact of social factors onto PPS representation. Our social world also influences the personal space (PS), a concept stemming from social psychology, defined as the space we keep between us and others to avoid discomfort. Here we analytically compare PPS and PS with the aim of understanding if and how they relate to each other. At the behavioral level, the multiplicity of experimental methodologies, whether well-established or novel, lead to somewhat divergent results and interpretations. Beyond behavior, we review physiological and neural signatures of PPS representation to discuss how interoceptive signals could contribute to PPS representation, as well as how these internal signals could shape the neural responses of PPS representation. In particular, by merging exteroceptive information from the environment and internal signals that come from the body, PPS may promote an integrated representation of the self, as distinct from the environment and the others. We put forward that integrating internal and external signals in the brain for perception of proximal environmental stimuli may also provide us with a better understanding of the processes at play during social interactions. Adopting such an integrative stance may offer novel insights about PPS representation in a social world. Finally, we discuss possible links between PPS research and social cognition, a link that may contribute to the understanding of intentions and feelings of others around us and promote appropriate social interactions.

The Interrelation Between Peripersonal Action Space and Interpersonal Social Space: Psychophysiological Evidence and Clinical Implications

The peripersonal space is an adaptive and flexible interface between the body and the environment that fulfills a dual-motor function: preparing the body for voluntary object-oriented actions to interact with incentive stimuli and preparing the body for defensive responses when facing potentially harmful stimuli. In this position article, we provide arguments for the sensorimotor rooting of the peripersonal space representation and highlight the variables that contribute to its flexible and adaptive characteristics. We also demonstrate that peripersonal space represents a mediation zone between the body and the environment contributing to not only the control of goal-directed actions but also the organization of social life. The whole of the data presented and discussed led us to the proposal of a new theoretical framework linking the peripersonal action space and the interpersonal social space and we highlight how this theoretical framework can account for social behaviors in populations with socio-emotional deficits.

Close facial emotions enhance physiological responses and facilitate perceptual discrimination

Accumulating evidence indicates that the peripersonal space (PPS) constitutes a privileged area for efficient processing of proximal stimuli, allowing to flexibly adapt our behavior both to the physical and social environment. Whether and how behavioral and physiological signatures of PPS relate to each other in emotional contexts remains, though, elusive. Here, we addressed this question by having participants to discriminate male from female faces depicting different emotions (happiness, anger or neutral) and presented at different distances (50 cm-300 cm) while we measured the reaction time and accuracy of their responses, as well as pupillary diameter, heart rate and heart rate variability. Results showed facilitation of participants' performances (i.e., faster response time) when faces were presented close compared to far from the participants, even when controlling for retinal size across distances. These behavioral effects were accompanied by significant modulation of participants' physiological indexes when faces were presented in PPS. Interestingly, both PPS representation and physiological signals were affected by features of the seen faces such as the emotional valence, its sex and the participants' sex, revealing the profound impact of social context onto the autonomic state and behavior within PPS. Together, these findings suggest that both external and internal signals contribute in shaping PPS representation.

The toolish hand illusion: embodiment of a tool based on similarity with the hand

A tool can function as a body part yet not feel like one: Putting down a fork after dinner does not feel like losing a hand. However, studies show fake body-parts are embodied and experienced as parts of oneself. Typically, embodiment illusions have only been reported when the fake body-part visually resembles the real one. Here we reveal that participants can experience an illusion that a mechanical grabber, which looks scarcely like a hand, is part of their body. We found changes in three signatures of embodiment: the real hand’s perceived location, the feeling that the grabber belonged to the body, and autonomic responses to visible threats to the grabber. These findings show that artificial objects can become embodied even though they bear little visual resemblance to the hand.

The spatial effect of fearful faces in the autonomic response

Peripersonal space (PPS) corresponds to the space around the body and it is defined by the location in space where multimodal inputs from bodily and external stimuli are integrated. Its extent varies according to the characteristics of external stimuli, e.g., the salience of an emotional facial expression. In the present study, we investigated the psycho-physiological correlates of the extension phenomenon. Specifically, we investigated whether an approaching human face showing either an emotionally negative (fearful) or positive (joyful) facial expression would differentially modulate PPS representation, compared to the same face with a neutral expression. To this aim, we continuously recorded the skin conductance response (SCR) of 27 healthy participants while they watched approaching 3D avatar faces showing fearful, joyful or neutral expressions, and then pressed a button to respond to tactile stimuli delivered on their cheeks at three possible delays (visuo-tactile trials). The results revealed that the SCR to fearful faces, but not joyful or neutral faces, was modulated by the apparent distance from the participant's body. SCR increased from very far space to far and then to near space. We propose that the proximity of the fearful face provided a cue to the presence of a threat in the environment and elicited a robust and urgent organization of defensive responses. In contrast, there would be no need to organize defensive responses to joyful or neutral faces and, as a consequence, no SCR differences were found across spatial positions. These results confirm the defensive function of PPS.

The role of the co-actor's response reachability in the joint Simon effect: remapping of working space by tool use

The Simon effect, that is the advantage of the spatial correspondence between stimulus and response locations when stimulus location is task irrelevant, occurs even when the task is performed by two participants, each performing a go/no-go task. This effect, known as the joint Simon effect, does not emerge when participants sit outside each other's peripersonal space, thus suggesting that the presence of an active confederate in peripersonal space might provide a reference for response coding. The present study investigated whether this finding is due to the distance separating the participants and/or to the distance separating each participant and the other agent's response. In two experiments, pairs of participants performed a social detection task sitting outside each other's arm reach, with response keys located close to the participants or outside arm reach. When the response key was located outside the participant's arm reach, he/she could reach it by means of a tool. In Experiment 1, by means of a tool, participants could reach their response key only, while in Experiment 2, they could reach also their co-agent's response key. The joint Simon effect did not emerge when participants could not reach the co-actor's response, while it emerged when they could potentially reach the other participant's response using the tool, but only when turn taking was required. These results may be taken as evidence that the possibility to reach and act upon the co-actor's response key may be at the bases of compatibility effects observed in joint action contexts requiring complementary responses.

Positive self-perception and corticospinal excitability: Recalling positive behavior expands peripersonal space boundaries

Converging evidence suggests that peripersonal space has dynamic properties, that can be influenced by motor and cognitive factors. Here, we investigated whether changes in self-perception may impact upon peripersonal representation. Specifically, employing non-invasive brain stimulation, we tested whether corticospinal excitability elicited by objects placed in the vertical peripersonal vs extrapersonal space can be influenced by changes in self-perception after recalling a personal experience inducing the feeling of high power (vs. positivity vs. low power). In a preliminary study (Study 1, N = 39) participants were presented with an object, whose position was manipulated in the horizontal vs vertical space. We assessed corticospinal excitability by measuring Motor Evoked Potentials (MEPs) using Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation with Electromyography co-registration (TMS-EMG). In the horizontal condition, we replicated the well-known motor facilitation induced by objects falling in the peri vs extrapersonal space, while in the vertical dimension MEPs were higher in the extrapersonal space. In the main experiment (Study 2), participants (N = 55) were randomly assigned to feel high power, low power, or a general positive emotion and were asked to observe the same object positioned either in the peripersonal or in the extrapersonal vertical space. Results showed that in the low power condition MEPs were higher in the extrapersonal vs peripersonal, as in Study 1, while in high power and positive conditions MEPs were not influenced by distance. Taken together, our findings suggest a dissociable pattern of motor facilitation underlying vertical vs horizontal space perception and, crucially, that changes in self-perception can influence such a representation.

Experimentally induced pain does not influence updating of peripersonal space and body representations following tool-use

Representations of the body and peripersonal space can be distorted for people with some chronic pain conditions. Experimental pain induction can give rise to similar, but transient distortions in healthy individuals. However, spatial and bodily representations are dynamic, and constantly update as we interact with objects in our environment. It is unclear whether induced pain disrupts the mechanisms involved in updating these representations. In the present study, we sought to investigate the effect of induced pain on the updating of peripersonal space and body representations during and following tool-use. We compared performance under three conditions (pain, active placebo, neutral) on a visuotactile crossmodal congruency task and a tactile distance judgement task to measure updating of peripersonal space and body representations, respectively. Consistent with previous findings, the difference in crossmodal interference from visual distractors in the same compared to opposite visual field to the tactile target was less when tools were crossed than uncrossed. This suggests an extension of peripersonal space to incorporate the tips of the tools. Also consistent with previous findings, estimates of the felt tactile distance judgements decreased after active tool-use. In contrast to our predictions, however, we found no evidence that pain interfered with performance on either task when compared to the control conditions. Our findings suggest that the updating of peripersonal space and body representations is not disrupted by induced pain. That is, experiencing acute pain does not give rise to distorted representations of the body and peripersonal space that can be present in people with chronic pain conditions.

Somatosensory-guided tool use modifies arm representation for action

Tool-use changes both peripersonal space and body representations, with several effects being nowadays termed tool embodiment. Since somatosensation was typically accompanied by vision in most previous tool use studies, whether somatosensation alone is sufficient for tool embodiment remains unknown. Here we address this question via a task assessing arm length representation at an implicit level. Namely, we compared movement’s kinematics in blindfolded healthy participants when grasping an object before and after tool-use. Results showed longer latencies and smaller peaks in the arm transport component after tool-use, consistent with an increased length of arm representation. No changes were found in the hand grip component and correlations revealed similar kinematic signatures in naturally long-armed participants. Kinematics changes did not interact with target object position, further corroborating the finding that somatosensory-guided tool use may increase the represented size of the participants’ arm. Control experiments ruled out alternative interpretations based upon altered hand position sense. In addition, our findings indicate that tool-use effects are specific for the implicit level of arm representation, as no effect was observed on the explicit estimate of the forearm length. These findings demonstrate for the first time that somatosensation is sufficient for incorporating a tool that has never been seen, nor used before.

Enhanced audio-tactile multisensory interaction in a peripersonal task after echolocation

Peripersonal space (PPS) is created by a multisensory interaction between different sensory modalities and can be modified by experience. In this article, we investigated whether an auditory training, inside the peripersonal space area, can modify the PPS around the head in sighted participants. The auditory training was based on echolocation. We measured the participant's reaction times to a tactile stimulation on the neck, while task-irrelevant looming auditory stimuli were presented. Sounds more strongly affect tactile processing when located within a limited distance from the body. We measured spatially dependent audio-tactile interaction as a proxy of PPS representation before and after an echolocation training. We found a significant speeding effect on tactile RTs after echolocation, specifically when sounds where around the location where the echolocation task was performed. This effect could not be attributed to a task repetition effect nor to a shift of spatial attention, as no changes of PPS were found in two control groups of participants, who performed the PPS task after either a break or a temporal auditory task (with stimuli located at the same position of echolocation task). These findings show that echolocation affects multisensory processing inside PPS representation, likely to better represent the space where external stimuli, have to be localized.

Everything is worth when it is close to my body: How spatial proximity and stimulus valence affect visuo-tactile integration

The peripersonal space (PPS) is the space surrounding our body, represented in a multisensory fashion by integrating stimuli of different modalities. Recently, it has been demonstrated that PPS is emotionally connoted, being sensitive to the different affective valence of the stimuli located inside it. However, how visuo-tactile interactions can be spatially shaped by intrinsic or acquired valence of stimuli is not clear. To investigate this, we conducted three experiments in which participants performed a visuo-tactile interaction task, while the intrinsic valence (Exp. 1 and 2) or the learned valence (Exp. 3) of visual stimuli was manipulated. Participants were asked to respond as fast as possible to a tactile stimulus that was delivered while a visual stimulus was approaching (Exp.1 and 3) or receding (Exp.2) from the hand. Touch was synchronized with different distances of the visual stimulus from the hand. We found that both the expectancy of stimulus and the distance of the visual one from the hand impact RTs to tactile targets. Crucially, we found that spatial modulation was also influenced by stimulus valence, but only for the approaching and not the receding stimuli. At far distances, neutral stimuli yielded overall slower RTs than intrinsically positive or negative stimuli (Experiment 1), while no modulation was exerted by the level of conditioning (Experiment 3). At near distances, response to touches accompanied by looming neutral stimuli became as fast as that occurring with positive and negative ones. Stimulus valence did not interact with the expectancy of a tactile stimulus (Experiment 2). Overall, these findings support the vision that visuo-tactile interactions can be dynamically modulated by the valence of looming visual stimuli when these are located at longer distances from the body. When closer to it, all stimuli acquire saliency, regardless of their intrinsic or acquired valence, due to their proximity, and then relevance, to the body. Overall, a view of PPS as a gradient modulating visuo-tactile integration, also based on stimulus valence, is discussed.

What is peripersonal space? An examination of unresolved empirical issues and emerging findings

Findings from diverse fields of study, including neuroscience, psychology, zoology, and sociology, demonstrate that human and non-human primates maintain a representation of the space immediately surrounding the body, known as peripersonal space (PPS). However, progress in this field has been hampered by the lack of an agreed upon definition of PPS. Since the beginning of its formal study, scientists have argued that PPS plays a crucial role in both defensive and non-defensive actions. Yet consensus is lacking about the cognitive and neural instantiation of these functions. In particular, researchers have begun to ask whether a single, unified system of spatial-attentional resources supports both the defensive and non-defensive functions of PPS or, rather, whether there are multiple, independent systems. Moreover, there are open questions about the specificity of PPS. For example: Does PPS dissociate from other well-known phenomena such as personal space and the body schema? Finally, emerging research has brought attention to important questions about individual differences in the flexibility of PPS and the distribution of PPS in front compared to behind the body. In this advanced review, we shed light on questions about the nature of PPS, offering answers when the research permits or providing recommendations for achieving answers in future research. In so doing, we lay the groundwork for a comprehensive definition of PPS. This article is categorized under: Cognitive Biology > Evolutionary Roots of Cognition Psychology > Attention Psychology > Perception and Psychophysics Neuroscience > Plasticity.

Physiological Response to Facial Expressions in Peripersonal Space Determines Interpersonal Distance in a Social Interaction Context

Accurate control of interpersonal distances in social contexts is an important determinant of effective social interactions. Although comfortable interpersonal distance seems to be dependent on social factors such as the gender, age and activity of the confederates, it also seems to be modulated by the way we represent our peripersonal-action space. To test this hypothesis, the present study investigated the relation between the emotional responses registered through electrodermal activity (EDA) triggered by human-like point-light displays (PLDs) carrying different facial expressions (neutral, angry, happy) when located in the participants peripersonal or extrapersonal space, and the comfort distance with the same PLDs when approaching and crossing the participants fronto-parallel axis on the right or left side. The results show an increase of the phasic EDA for PLDs with angry facial expressions located in the peripersonal space (reachability judgment task), in comparison to the same PLDs located in the extrapersonal space, which was not observed for PLDs with neutral or happy facial expressions. The results also show an increase of the comfort distance for PLDs approaching the participants with an angry facial expression (interpersonal comfort distance judgment task), in comparison to PLDs with happy and neutral ones, which was related to the increase of the physiological response. Overall, the findings indicate that comfort social space can be predicted from the emotional reaction triggered by a confederate when located within the observer’s peripersonal space. This suggests that peripersonal-action space and interpersonal-social space are similarly sensitive to the emotional valence of the confederate, which could reflect a common adaptive mechanism in specifying theses spaces to subtend interactions with both the physical and social environment, but also to ensure body protection from potential threats.

Gravitational cues modulate the shape of defensive peripersonal space

The potential damage caused by an environmental threat increases with proximity to the body, so animals perform more effective and stronger defensive responses when threatening stimuli occur nearby the body, in a region termed the defensive peripersonal space (DPPS) [1,2]. We recently characterized the fine-grained geometry of the face's DPPS by recording the enhancement of the blink reflex elicited by electrical stimulation of the median nerve (hand-blink reflex, HBR), when the hand is closer to the face [3]. The resulting DPPS has the shape of a bubble, elongated asymmetrically along the rostro-caudal axis, extending further above eye-level [4]. We hypothesized that this vertical asymmetry is determined by gravitational cues: the probability that a threat will hit the body is higher when it comes from above. By systematically altering body posture, we show that the extent of DPPS asymmetry is defined in an earth-centred coordinate frame. This observation suggests the brain takes gravitational cues to automatically update threat value in an adaptive mechanism that accounts for the simple fact that objects fall down.

Individual Differences in the Flexibility of Peripersonal Space

Abstract. The current study investigated individual differences in the flexibility of peripersonal space (i.e., representational space near the body), specifically in relation to trait claustrophobic fear (i.e., fear of suffocating or being physically restricted). Participants completed a line bisection task with either a laser pointer (Laser condition), allowing for a baseline measure of the size of one’s peripersonal space, or a stick (Stick condition), which produces expansion of one’s peripersonal space. Our results revealed that individuals high in claustrophobic fear had larger peripersonal spaces than those lower in claustrophobic fear, replicating previous research. We also found that, whereas individuals low in claustrophobic fear demonstrated the expected expansion of peripersonal space in the Stick condition, individuals high in claustrophobic fear showed less expansion, suggesting decreased flexibility. We discuss these findings in relation to the defensive function of peripersonal space and reduced attentional flexibility associated with trait anxieties.

Keeping you at arm's length: modifying peripersonal space influences interpersonal distance

Peripersonal space represents the area around the body where objects are coded in motor terms for the purpose of voluntary goal-directed actions. Previous studies have suggested that peripersonal space is also a safe space linked with our private area, influencing interpersonal space in social contexts. However, whether these two spaces rely on similar embodied processes remains an open issue. In the present study, participants observed a point-light walker (PLW) approaching them from different directions and passing near them at different distances from their right or left shoulder. While approaching, the PLW disappeared at a distance of 2 m and the task for the participants was to estimate if the interpersonal distance, at the time the PLW would have reached their level, was comfortable or not. Between two sessions of comfort judgments, the participants manipulated a 70 cm tool entailing an extension of peripersonal space, or a 10 cm tool entailing no extension of peripersonal space. The results revealed that the comfortable interpersonal distance was larger when the PLW crossed the mid-sagittal plane of the participants than when it approached them laterally, with a concomitant increase of response time. After participants manipulated the long tool, comfortable interpersonal distance increased, but predominantly when the PLW trajectory implied crossing the participants' mid-sagittal plane. This effect was not observed when participants manipulated the short tool. Two control tasks showed that using the long tool modified the reachability (control 1), but not the time to passage (control 2) estimates of PLW stimuli, suggesting that tool use extended peripersonal space without changing perceived visual distances. Overall, the data show that comfortable interpersonal distance is linked to the representation of peripersonal space. As a consequence, increasing peripersonal space through tool use has the immediate consequence that comfortable interpersonal distance from another person also increases, suggesting that interpersonal-comfort space and peripersonal-reaching space share a common motor nature.

What's Coming Near? The Influence of Dynamical Visual Stimuli on Nociceptive Processing

Objects approaching us may pose a threat, and signal the need to initiate defensive behavior. Detecting these objects early is crucial to either avoid the object or prepare for contact most efficiently. This requires the construction of a coherent representation of our body, and the space closely surrounding our body, i.e. the peripersonal space. This study, with 27 healthy volunteers, investigated how the processing of nociceptive stimuli applied to the hand is influenced by dynamical visual stimuli either approaching or receding from the hand. On each trial a visual stimulus was either approaching or receding the participant's left or right hand. At different temporal delays from the onset of the visual stimulus, a nociceptive stimulus was applied either at the same or the opposite hand, so that it was presented when the visual stimulus was perceived at varying distances from the hand. Participants were asked to respond as fast as possible at which side they perceived a nociceptive stimulus. We found that reaction times were fastest when the visual stimulus appeared near the stimulated hand. Moreover, investigating the influence of the visual stimuli along the continuous spatial range (from near to far) showed that approaching lights had a stronger spatially dependent effect on nociceptive processing, compared to receding lights. These results suggest that the coding of nociceptive information in a peripersonal frame of reference may constitute a safety margin around the body that is designed to protect it from potential physical threat.

Tool-use: An open window into body representation and its plasticity

Over the last decades, scientists have questioned the origin of the exquisite human mastery of tools. Seminal studies in monkeys, healthy participants and brain-damaged patients have primarily focused on the plastic changes that tool-use induces on spatial representations. More recently, we focused on the modifications tool-use must exert on the sensorimotor system and highlighted plastic changes at the level of the body representation used by the brain to control our movements, i.e., the Body Schema. Evidence is emerging for tool-use to affect also more visually and conceptually based representations of the body, such as the Body Image. Here we offer a critical review of the way different tool-use paradigms have been, and should be, used to try disentangling the critical features that are responsible for tool incorporation into different body representations. We will conclude that tool-use may offer a very valuable means to investigate high-order body representations and their plasticity.

The Remapping of Time by Active Tool-Use

Multiple, action-based space representations are each based on the extent to which action is possible toward a specific sector of space, such as near/reachable and far/unreachable. Studies on tool-use revealed how the boundaries between these representations are dynamic. Space is not only multidimensional and dynamic, but it is also known for interacting with other dimensions of magnitude, such as time. However, whether time operates on similar action-driven multiple representations and whether it can be modulated by tool-use is yet unknown. To address these issues, healthy participants performed a time bisection task in two spatial positions (near and far space) before and after an active tool-use training, which consisted of performing goal-directed actions holding a tool with their right hand (Experiment 1). Before training, perceived stimuli duration was influenced by their spatial position defined by action. Hence, a dissociation emerged between near/reachable and far/unreachable space. Strikingly, this dissociation disappeared after the active tool-use training since temporal stimuli were now perceived as nearer. The remapping was not found when a passive tool-training was executed (Experiment 2) or when the active tool-training was performed with participants' left hand (Experiment 3). Moreover, no time remapping was observed following an equivalent active hand-training but without a tool (Experiment 4). Taken together, our findings reveal that time processing is based on action-driven multiple representations. The dynamic nature of these representations is demonstrated by the remapping of time, which is action- and effector-dependent.

Body visual discontinuity affects feeling of ownership and skin conductance responses

When we look at our hands we are immediately aware that they belong to us and we rarely doubt about the integrity, continuity and sense of ownership of our bodies. Here we explored whether the mere manipulation of the visual appearance of a virtual limb could influence the subjective feeling of ownership and the physiological responses (Skin Conductance Responses, SCRs) associated to a threatening stimulus approaching the virtual hand. Participants observed in first person perspective a virtual body having the right hand-forearm (i) connected by a normal wrist (Full-Limb) or a thin rigid wire connection (Wire) or (ii) disconnected because of a missing wrist (m-Wrist) or a missing wrist plus a plexiglass panel positioned between the hand and the forearm (Plexiglass). While the analysis of subjective ratings revealed that only the observation of natural full connected virtual limb elicited high levels of ownership, high amplitudes of SCRs were found also during observation of the non-natural, rigid wire connection condition. This result suggests that the conscious embodiment of an artificial limb requires a natural looking visual body appearance while implicit reactivity to threat may require physical body continuity, even non-naturally looking, that allows the implementation of protective reactions to threat.