Ana Tajadura-Jiménez, Manos Tsakiris, Torsten Marquardt, Nadia Bianchi-Berthouze
Abstract
Auditory feedback accompanies almost all our actions, but its contribution to body-representation is understudied. Recently it has been shown that the auditory distance of action sounds recalibrates perceived tactile distances on one's arm, suggesting that action sounds can change the mental representation of arm length. However, the question remains open of what factors play a role in this recalibration. In this study we investigate two of these factors, kinaesthesia, and sense of agency. Across two experiments, we asked participants to tap with their arm on a surface while extending their arm. We manipulated the tapping sounds to originate at double the distance to the tapping locations, as well as their synchrony to the action, which is known to affect feelings of agency over the sounds. Kinaesthetic cues were manipulated by having additional conditions in which participants did not displace their arm but kept tapping either close (Experiment 1) or far (Experiment 2) from their body torso. Results show that both the feelings of agency over the action sounds and kinaesthetic cues signaling arm displacement when displacement of the sound source occurs are necessary to observe changes in perceived tactile distance on the arm. In particular, these cues resulted in the perceived tactile distances on the arm being felt smaller, as compared to distances on a reference location. Moreover, our results provide the first evidence of consciously perceived changes in arm-representation evoked by action sounds and suggest that the observed changes in perceived tactile distance relate to experienced arm elongation. We discuss the observed effects in the context of forward internal models of sensorimotor integration. Our results add to these models by showing that predictions related to action sounds must fit with kinaesthetic cues in order for auditory inputs to change body-representation.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 July 2015.
All research outputs
#6,791,049
of 22,803,211 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#9,727
of 29,717 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#79,811
of 265,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#222
of 526 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,803,211 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,717 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 265,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 526 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 57% of its contemporaries.
