Abstract:Introduction: Our brain continuously maps our body in space. It has been suggested that at least two main frames of reference are used to process somatosensory stimuli presented on our own body: the anatomical frame of reference (based on the somatotopic representation of our body in the somatosensory cortex) and the spatial frame of reference (where body parts are mapped in external space). Interestingly, a mismatch between somatotopic and spatial information significantly affects the processing of bodily information, as demonstrated by the "crossing hand" effect. However, it is not clear if this impairment occurs not only when the conflict between these frames of reference is determined by a static change in the body position (e.g., by crossing the hands) but also when new associations between motor and sensory responses are artificially created (e.g., by presenting feedback stimuli on a side of the body that is not involved in the movement). Methods: In the present study, 16 participants performed a temporal order judgment task before and after a congruent or incongruent visual-tactile-motor- task in virtual reality. During the VR task, participants had to move a cube using a virtual stick. In the congruent condition, the haptic feedback during the interaction with the cube was provided on the right hand (the one used to control the stick). In the incongruent condition, the haptic feedback was provided to the contralateral hand, simulating a sort of 'active' crossed feedback during the interaction. Using a psychophysical approach, the point of subjective equality (or PSE, i.e., the probability of responding left or right to the first stimulus in the sequence in 50% of the cases) and the JND (accuracy) were calculated for both conditions, before and after the VR-task. Results: After the VR task, compared to the baseline condition, the PSE shifted toward the hand that received the haptic feedback during the interaction (toward the right hand for the congruent condition and toward the left hand for the incongruent condition). Dicussion: This study demonstrated the possibility of inducing spatial biases in the processing of bodily information by modulating the sensory-motor interaction between stimuli in virtual environments (while keeping constant the actual position of the body in space).

How visual experience shapes body representation

The Virtual Hand Illusion is Moderated by Context-Induced Spatial Reference Frames.

Why Do Things Seem Closer Than They Are?

How our body influences our perception of the world

Experiencing an elongated limb in virtual reality modifies the tactile distance perception of the corresponding real limb

On the anisotropy of perceived ground extents and the interpretation of walked distance as a measure of perception.

Does visual experience influence arm proprioception and its lateralization? Evidence from passive matching performance in congenitally-blind and sighted adults

Can Spatial Biases Be Eliminated Through Learning?

Gulliver's virtual travels: active embodiment in extreme body sizes for modulating our body representations

Anisotropies of tactile distance perception on the face

Did you skip leg day? The neural mechanisms of muscle perception for body parts

Degraded Visibility Body-Specifically Affects Mental Rotation

Representations of the relative proportions of body part width

Modality-independent effect of gravity in shaping the internal representation of 3D space for visual and haptic object perception

Haptic experience of bodies alters body perception

Perceived hand size and perceived hand weight

Biases in hand perception are driven by somatosensory computations, not a distorted hand model

Spatial tactile localization depends on sensorimotor binding: preliminary evidence from virtual reality

Sociocultural Pressures, Internalization, and Body Esteem in Congenitally Blind, Late-Blind, and Sighted Men and Women

Which Body Would You Like to Have? The Impact of Embodied Perspective on Body Perception and Body Evaluation in Immersive Virtual Reality