↓ Skip to main content

Combined Induction of Rubber-Hand Illusion and Out-of-Body Experiences

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (79th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
107 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Combined Induction of Rubber-Hand Illusion and Out-of-Body Experiences
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00128
Pubmed ID
Authors

Isadora Olivé, Alain Berthoz

Abstract

The emergence of self-consciousness depends on several processes: those of body ownership, attributing self-identity to the body, and those of self-location, localizing our sense of self. Studies of phenomena like the rubber-hand illusion (RHi) and out-of-body experience (OBE) investigate these processes, respectively for representations of a body-part and the full-body. It is supposed that RHi only target processes related to body-part representations, while OBE only relates to full-body representations. The fundamental question whether the body-part and the full-body illusions relate to each other is nevertheless insufficiently investigated. In search for a link between body-part and full-body illusions in the brain we developed a behavioral task combining adapted versions of the RHi and OBE. Furthermore, for the investigation of this putative link we investigated the role of sensory and motor cues. We established a spatial dissociation between visual and proprioceptive feedback of a hand perceived through virtual reality in rest or action. Two experimental measures were introduced: one for the body-part illusion, the proprioceptive drift of the perceived localization of the hand, and one for the full-body illusion, the shift in subjective-straight-ahead (SSA). In the rest and action conditions it was observed that the proprioceptive drift of the left hand and the shift in SSA toward the manipulation side are equivalent. The combined effect was dependent on the manipulation of the visual representation of body parts, rejecting any main or even modulatory role for relevant motor programs. Our study demonstrates for the first time that there is a systematic relationship between the body-part illusion and the full-body illusion, as shown by our measures. This suggests a link between the representations in the brain of a body-part and the full-body, and consequently a common mechanism underpinning both forms of ownership and self-location.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 107 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Denmark 2 2%
Spain 1 <1%
Italy 1 <1%
Taiwan 1 <1%
Unknown 102 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 16%
Researcher 14 13%
Student > Master 13 12%
Student > Bachelor 9 8%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 7%
Other 24 22%
Unknown 23 21%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 36 34%
Neuroscience 12 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 11 10%
Computer Science 7 7%
Engineering 6 6%
Other 12 11%
Unknown 23 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 April 2015.
All research outputs
#5,557,364
of 25,759,158 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,945
of 34,778 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#43,900
of 251,832 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#134
of 481 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,759,158 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,778 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% 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 251,832 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 79% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 481 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 71% of its contemporaries.