Temporal recalibration in response to delayed visual feedback of active versus passive actions: an fMRI study

The brain can adapt its expectations about the relative timing of actions and their sensory outcomes in a process known as temporal recalibration. This might occur as the recalibration of timing between the sensory (e.g. visual) outcome and (1) the motor act (sensorimotor) or (2) tactile/proprioceptive information (inter-sensory). This fMRI recalibration study investigated sensorimotor contributions to temporal recalibration by comparing active and passive conditions. Subjects were repeatedly exposed to delayed (150 ms) or undelayed visual stimuli, triggered by active or passive button presses. Recalibration effects were tested in delay detection tasks, including visual and auditory outcomes. We showed that both modalities were affected by visual recalibration. However, an active advantage was observed only in visual conditions. Recalibration was generally associated with the left cerebellum (lobules IV, V and vermis) while action related activation (active > passive) occurred in the right middle/superior frontal gyri during adaptation and test phases. Recalibration transfer from vision to audition was related to action specific activations in the cingulate cortex, the angular gyrus and left inferior frontal gyrus. Our data provide new insights in sensorimotor contributions to temporal recalibration via the middle/superior frontal gyri and inter-sensory contributions mediated by the cerebellum.

The Effect of Noisy Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation on Learning of Functional Mobility and Manual Control Nulling Sensorimotor Tasks

Galvanic vestibular stimulation (GVS) is a non-invasive method of electrically stimulating the vestibular system. We investigated whether the application of GVS can alter the learning of new functional mobility and manual control tasks and whether learning can be retained following GVS application. In a between-subjects experiment design, 36 healthy subjects performed repeated trials, capturing the learning of either (a) a functional mobility task, navigating an obstacle course on a compliant surface with degraded visual cues or (b) a manual control task, using a joystick to null self-roll tilt against a pseudo-random disturbance while seated in the dark. In the “learning” phase of trials, bilateral, bipolar GVS was applied continuously. The GVS waveform also differed between subjects in each task group: (1) white noisy galvanic vestibular stimulation (nGVS) at 0.3 mA (2) high-level random GVS at 0.7 mA (selected from pilot testing as destabilizing, but not painful), or (3) with the absence of stimulation (i.e., sham). Following the “learning” trials, all subjects were blindly transitioned to sham GVS, upon which they immediately completed another series of trials to assess any aftereffects. In the functional mobility task, we found nGVS significantly improved task learning (p = 0.03, mean learning metric 171% more than the sham group). Further, improvements in learning the functional mobility task with nGVS were retained, even once the GVS application was stopped. The benefits in learning with nGVS were not observed in the manual control task. High level GVS tended to inhibit learning in both tasks, but not significantly so. Even once the high-level stimulation was stopped, the impaired performance remained. Improvements in learning with nGVS may be due to increased information throughput resulting from stochastic resonance. The benefit of nGVS for functional mobility, but not manual control nulling, may be due to the multisensory (e.g., visual and proprioceptive), strategic, motor coordination, or spatial awareness aspects of the former task. Learning improvements with nGVS have the potential to benefit individuals who perform functional mobility tasks, such as astronauts, firefighters, high performance athletes, and soldiers.

Why There Is a Vestibular Sense, or How Metacognition Individuates the Senses

Should the vestibular system be counted as a sense? This basic conceptual question remains surprisingly controversial. While it is possible to distinguish specific vestibular organs, it is not clear that this suffices to identify a genuine vestibular sense because of the supposed absence of a distinctive vestibular personal-level manifestation. The vestibular organs instead contribute to more general multisensory representations, whose name still suggest that they have a distinct 'sensory' contribution. The vestibular case shows a good example of the challenge of individuating the senses when multisensory interactions are the norm, neurally, representationally and phenomenally. Here, we propose that an additional metacognitive criterion can be used to single out a distinct sense, besides the existence of specific organs and despite the fact that the information coming from these organs is integrated with other sensory information. We argue that it is possible for human perceivers to monitor information coming from distinct organs, despite their integration, as exhibited and measured through metacognitive performance. Based on the vestibular case, we suggest that metacognitive awareness of the information coming from sensory organs constitutes a new criterion to individuate a sense through both physiological and personal criteria. This new way of individuating the senses accommodates both the specialised nature of sensory receptors as well as the intricate multisensory aspect of neural processes and experience, while maintaining the idea that each sense contributes something special to how we monitor the world and ourselves, at the subjective level.

Balancing body ownership: Visual capture of proprioception and affectivity during vestibular stimulation

The experience of our body as our own (i.e. body ownership) involves integrating different sensory signals according to their contextual relevance (i.e. multisensory integration). Until recently, most studies of multisensory integration and body ownership concerned only vision, touch and proprioception; the role of other modalities, such as the vestibular system and interoception, has been neglected and remains poorly understood. In particular, no study to date has directly explored the combined effect of vestibular and interoceptive signals on body ownership. Here, we investigated for the first time how Galvanic Vestibular Stimulation (left, right, sham), tactile affectivity (a reclassified interoceptive modality manipulated by applying touch at C-tactile optimal versus non-optimal velocities), and their combination, influence proprioceptive and subjective measures of body ownership during a rubber hand illusion paradigm with healthy participants (N = 26). Our results show that vestibular stimulation (left GVS) significantly increased proprioceptive drift towards the rubber hand during mere visual exposure to the rubber hand. Moreover, it also enhanced participants’ proprioceptive drift towards the rubber hand during manipulations of synchronicity and affective touch. These findings suggest that the vestibular system influences multisensory integration, possibly by re-weighting both the two-way relationship between proprioception and vision, as well as the three-way relationship between proprioception, vision and affective touch. We discuss these findings in relation to current predictive coding models of multisensory integration and body ownership.

•

We studied vestibular and affective contributions to body ownership.

•

We stimulated the vestibular system in a Rubber Hand paradigm with affective touch.

•

Right-hemisphere stimulation increased proprioceptive drift during vision of a RH.

•

Applying affective touch further increased proprioceptive drift.

•

Affective and vestibular signals may favour vision in multisensory integration.

Inducing ownership over an 'other' perspective with a visuo-tactile manipulation

Seeing our body from a 'self' perspective while performing a movement improves our ability to detect asynchrony between the visual and proprioceptive information concerning that movement: a signature of enhanced body ownership referred to as the 'self-advantage'. We consequently experience no self-advantage when seeing our body from an 'other' perspective. Here we ask whether introducing visuo-tactile stimulation (VTS), similar to that used in the rubber hand illusion to invoke ownership over a dummy hand, would produce a self-advantage when viewing the body from a typically 'other' perspective. Prior to the experiment, participants watched a live video of their own back using a camera mounted behind them while their back was tapped with a rod for 2 min. The video was either synchronous (sVTS) or asynchronous (aVTS) with the tapping. Participants then raised their hands and made a stereotyped finger movement that they watched from the same camera either in the original, natural perspective or upside down. Participants indicated which of two periods (one with minimum delay and one with an added delay of 33-264 ms) appeared delayed. Sensitivity was calculated using psychometric functions. The sVTS group showed a self-advantage of about 45 ms in the natural visual condition compared to the upside down condition, whereas the aVTS group showed no difference between the two conditions. Synchronous visuo-tactile experience increased the feeling of ownership over a typically 'other' perspective in a quantifiable way indicating the multisensory and malleable nature of body representation.

The vestibular body: Vestibular contributions to bodily representations

Vestibular signals are integrated with signals from other sensory modalities. This convergence could reflect an important mechanism for maintaining the perception of the body. Here we review the current literature in order to develop a framework for understanding how the vestibular system contributes to body representation. According to recent models, we distinguish between three processes for body representation, and we look at whether vestibular signals might influence each process. These are (i) somatosensation, the primary sensory processing of somatic stimuli, (ii) somatoperception, the processes of constructing percepts and experiences of somatic objects and events and (iii) somatorepresentation, the knowledge about the body as a physical object in the world. Vestibular signals appear to contribute to all three levels in this model of body processing. Thus, the traditional view of the vestibular system as a low-level, dedicated orienting module tends to underestimate the pervasive role of vestibular input in bodily self-awareness.

Left-handers show no self-advantage in detecting a delay in visual feedback concerning an active movement

Right-handed people show an advantage in detecting a delay in visual feedback concerning an active movement of their right hand when it is viewed in a natural perspective compared to when it is seen as if viewing another person's hand (Hoover and Harris in Exp Brain Res 233:1053-1060, 2012. doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-4181-9 ; Exp Brain Res 222:389-397, 2015a. doi: 10.1007/s00221-012-3224-3 ). This self-advantage is unique to their dominant hand and may reflect an enhanced sense of ownership which contributes to how right-handed people relate to the world. Here we asked whether left-handers show the same pattern of performance for their dominant hand. We measured the minimum delay that could be detected by 29 left-handers when viewing either their dominant or non-dominant hand from 'self' or 'other' perspectives and compared their thresholds to an age-matched sample of 22 right-handers. Right-handers showed a significant signature self-advantage of 19 ms when viewing their dominant hand in an expected 'self' perspective compared to 'other' perspectives. Left-handers, however, showed no such advantage for either their dominant or non-dominant hand. This lack of self-advantage in detecting delayed visual feedback might indicate a less secure sense of body ownership amongst left-handers.

Left caloric vestibular stimulation as a tool to reveal implicit and explicit parameters of body representation

Homeostatic parameters, such as temperature, are related to body representation. In this study, we measured whether caloric vestibular stimulation (CVS) alters body temperature and tactile processing, and if in the direction predicted by a holistic body matrix representation. Skin temperature and tactile two-point discrimination (TPD) acuity were measured for both arms before, immediately after and with a delay from CVS. Participants were also administered a personality questionnaire and an anxiety inventory to rule out confounding factors. Two control experiments were planned to exclude casual variations. Our results show that temperature drops significantly in both arms after CVS. CVS also induces a bilateral improvement in tactile acuity (even though not immediately after but in the delayed condition). Finally, these effects are not due to learning, as demonstrated by the control experiment. In summary, our results suggest that vestibular stimulation updates body representation, supporting the evidence in favor of a body matrix.