Facilitation of tactile processing during action observation of goal-directed reach and grasp movements

Distinct role of central predictive mechanisms in tactile suppression

Tactile sensitivity on a limb is reduced during movement. This tactile suppression results presumably from central predictive mechanisms that downregulate sensations caused during voluntary action. Suppression also occurs during passive movements, indicating a role for peripheral mechanisms, questioning the predictive nature of suppression. Yet, predictions existing beyond the motor domain (non-motor predictions) can also modulate tactile suppression. This study aimed to disentangle central motor predictive and peripheral feedback mechanisms while accounting for non-motor predictions. Participants detected tactile stimuli on their limb shortly before it moved in an active or passive manner. Passive movements were either fully (100%) or partially (50%) predictable. We found tactile suppression during both active and passive movements irrespective of whether the passive movements were predictable. Importantly, tactile suppression was stronger in active than passive movements highlighting the specific role of central predictive mechanisms.

Sensorimotor processing is dependent on observed speed during the observation of hand-hand and hand-object interactions

Observing a physical interaction between individuals (e.g., observing friends shaking hands) or between an object and an individual (e.g., observing a teammate striking or being struck with a ball) can lead to somatosensory activation in the observer. However, it is not known whether the speed of the observed interaction modulates such somatosensory activation (e.g., observing a teammate being struck with a slow vs. a fast-moving ball). In three experiments, participants observed a hand or object interact with another hand or object, all presented with a slow- or fast-moving effector. To probe sensorimotor processes during observation, participants were asked to react to an auditory beep (i.e., response time [RT] task) at the moment of observed contact. If observed contact led to increased somatosensory activation, RTs would decrease due to statistical and/ or intersensory facilitation. In all three experiments, RTs were lower when observing fast compared to slow motion stimuli, regardless of the moving (i.e., hand or ball) and target stimulus (i.e., hand or leaf). Further, when only an object (i.e., leaf) was the target, RTs did not differ between the moving hand and moving ball condition. In contrast, when an object (i.e., ball) was used as the moving stimulus, the magnitude of the speed effect (i.e., fast - slow RT difference) was significantly larger when the ball contacted a hand as compared to a leaf. Overall, these results provide novel evidence for a relationship between the observed kinematics of an object-human interaction and the sensorimotor processing in the observer.

Tactile facilitation during actual and mere expectation of object reception

During reaching and grasping movements tactile processing is typically suppressed. However, during a reception or catching task, the object can still be acquired but without suppressive processes related to movement execution. Rather, tactile information may be facilitated as the object approaches in anticipation of object contact and the utilization of tactile feedback. Therefore, the current study investigated tactile processing during a reception task. Participants sat with their upper limb still as an object travelled to and contacted their fingers. At different points along the object's trajectory and prior to contact, participants were asked to detect tactile stimuli delivered to their index finger. To understand if the expectation of object contact contributed to any modulation in tactile processing, the object stopped prematurely on 20% of trials. Compared to a pre-object movement baseline, relative perceptual thresholds were decreased throughout the object's trajectory, and even when the object stopped prematurely. Further, there was no evidence for modulation when the stimulus was presented shortly before object contact. The former results suggest that tactile processing is facilitated as an object approaches an individual's hand. As well, we purport that the expectation of tactile feedback drives this modulation. Finally, the latter results suggest that peripheral masking may have reduced/abolished any facilitation.