Approach of visual stimuli facilitates the prediction of tactile events and suppresses beta band oscillations around the primary somatosensory area

Visual context affects the perceived timing of tactile sensations elicited through intra-cortical microstimulation

Intra-cortical microstimulation (ICMS) is a technique to provide tactile sensations for a somatosensory brain-machine interface (BMI). A viable BMI must function within the rich, multisensory environment of the real world, but how ICMS is integrated with other sensory modalities is poorly understood. To investigate how ICMS percepts are integrated with visual information, ICMS and visual stimuli were delivered at varying times relative to one another. Both visual context and ICMS current amplitude were found to bias the qualitative experience of ICMS. In two tetraplegic participants, ICMS and visual stimuli were more likely to be experienced as occurring simultaneously when visual stimuli were more realistic, demonstrating an effect of visual context on the temporal binding window. The peak of the temporal binding window varied but was consistently offset from zero, suggesting that multisensory integration with ICMS can suffer from temporal misalignment. Recordings from primary somatosensory cortex (S1) during catch trials where visual stimuli were delivered without ICMS demonstrated that S1 represents visual information related to ICMS across visual contexts.

Visual stimuli in the peripersonal space facilitate the spatial prediction of tactile events-A comparison between approach and nearness effects

Previous studies reported that an object in one's peripersonal space (PPS) attracts attention and facilitates subsequent processing of stimuli. Recent studies showed that visual stimuli approaching the body facilitated the spatial prediction of subsequent tactile events, even if these stimuli were task-irrelevant. However, it is unclear whether the approach is important for facilitating this prediction or if the simple existence of stimuli within the PPS is what matters. The present study aimed to scrutinize the predictive function of visuo-tactile interaction in the PPS by examining the effects of visual stimuli approaching the hand and of visual stimuli near the hand. For this purpose, we examined electroencephalograms (EEGs) during a simple reaction time task for tactile stimuli when visual stimuli were presented approaching the hand or were presented near the hand, and we analyzed event-related spectral perturbation (ERSP) as an index of prediction and event-related brain potentials (ERPs) as an index of attention and prediction error. The tactile stimulus was presented to the left (or right) wrist with a high probability (80%) and to the opposite wrist with a low probability (20%). In the approach condition, three visual stimuli were presented approaching the hand to which the high-probability tactile stimulus was presented; in the near condition, three visual stimuli were presented repeatedly near the hand with the high-probability tactile stimulus. Beta-band activity at the C3 and C4 electrodes, around the primary somatosensory area, was suppressed before the onset of the tactile stimulus, and this suppression was larger in the approach condition than in the near condition. The P3 amplitude for high-probability stimuli in the approach condition was larger than that in the near condition. These results revealed that the approach of visual stimuli facilitates spatial prediction and processing of subsequent tactile stimuli compared to situations in which visual stimuli just exist within the PPS. This study indicated that approaching visual stimuli facilitates the prediction of subsequent tactile events, even if they are task-irrelevant.

Contingent negative variation to tactile stimuli - differences in anticipatory and preparatory processes between participants with and without blindness

People who are blind demonstrate remarkable abilities within the spared senses and compensatory enhancement of cognitive skills, underscored by substantial plastic reorganization in relevant neural areas. However, little is known about whether people with blindness form top-down models of the world on short timescales more efficiently to guide goal-oriented behavior. This electroencephalography study investigates this hypothesis at the neurophysiological level, focusing on contingent negative variation (CNV) as a marker of anticipatory and preparatory processes prior to expected events. In sum, 20 participants with blindness and 27 sighted participants completed a classic CNV task and a memory CNV task, both containing tactile stimuli to exploit the expertise of the former group. Although the reaction times in the classic CNV task did not differ between groups, participants who are blind reached higher performance rates in the memory task. This superior performance co-occurred with a distinct neurophysiological profile, relative to controls: greater late CNV amplitudes over central areas, suggesting enhanced stimulus expectancy and motor preparation prior to key events. Controls, in contrast, recruited more frontal sites, consistent with inefficient sensory-aligned control. We conclude that in more demanding cognitive contexts exploiting the spared senses, people with blindness efficiently generate task-relevant internal models to facilitate behavior.

S1 represents multisensory contexts and somatotopic locations within and outside the bounds of the cortical homunculus

Recent literature suggests that tactile events are represented in the primary somatosensory cortex (S1) beyond its long-established topography; in addition, the extent to which S1 is modulated by vision remains unclear. To better characterize S1, human electrophysiological data were recorded during touches to the forearm or finger. Conditions included visually observed physical touches, physical touches without vision, and visual touches without physical contact. Two major findings emerge from this dataset. First, vision strongly modulates S1 area 1, but only if there is a physical element to the touch, suggesting that passive touch observation is insufficient to elicit neural responses. Second, despite recording in a putative arm area of S1, neural activity represents both arm and finger stimuli during physical touches. Arm touches are encoded more strongly and specifically, supporting the idea that S1 encodes tactile events primarily through its topographic organization but also more generally, encompassing other areas of the body.