The brain’s fingers and hands

  • Patrick Haggard
  • Keiko Kitadono
  • Clare Press
  • Marisa Taylor-Clarke
Research Article

Abstract

The brain keeps track of the changing positions of body parts in space using a spatial body schema. When subjects localise a tactile stimulus on the skin, they might either use a somatotopic body map, or use a body schema to identify the location of the stimulation in external space. Healthy subjects were touched on the fingertips, with the hands in one of two postures: either the right hand was vertically above the left, or the fingers of both hands were interwoven. Subjects made speeded verbal responses to identify either the finger or the hand that was touched. Interweaving the fingers significantly impaired hand identification across several experiments, but had no effect on finger identification. Our results suggest that identification of fingers occurs in a somatotopic representation or finger schema. Identification of hands uses a general body schema, and is influenced by external spatial location. This dissociation implies that touches on the finger can only be identified with a particular hand after a process of assigning fingers to hands. This assignment is based on external spatial location. Our results suggest a role of the body schema in the identification of structural body parts from touch.

Keywords

Touch Somatosensory Finger Hand Body schema Human 

References

  1. Benedetti F (1985) Processing of tactile spatial information with crossed fingers. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 11:517–525CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Benton AL (1959) Finger localization and finger praxis. Q J Exp Psychol 11:39–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Frith CD, Done RJ (1986) Routes to action in reaction time tasks. Psychol Res 48:169–177CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Graziano MSA, Gross CG (1993) A bimodal map of space - somatosensory receptive-fields in the macaque putamen with corresponding visual receptive-fields. Exp Brain Res 97:96–109CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Head H, Holmes HG (1911) Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain 34:102–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Henri V (1898) Ueber die. Raumwhrnehmungen des Tastsinnes. Reuther & Reichard BerlinGoogle Scholar
  7. Howell DC (1997) Statistical methods for psychology. 4th edn. Duxbury, BostonGoogle Scholar
  8. Iwamura Y (2000) Bilateral receptive field neurons and callosal connections in the somatosensory cortex. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 355:267–273CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Kalaska JF, Cohen DA, Prud’homme M, Hyde ML (1990) Parietal area 5 neuronal activity encodes movement kinematics, not movement dynamics. Exp Brain Res 80:351–364CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Kinsbourne M, Warrington EK (1962) A study of finger agnosia. Brain 85:47–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Nixon PD, Burbaud P, Passingham RE (1992) Control of arm movement after bilateral lesions of area 5 in the monkey (Macaca mulatta). Exp Brain Res 90:229–232CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Oliveri M, Caltagirone C, Filippi MM, Traversa R, Cicinelli P, Pasqualetti P, Rossini PM (2000) Paired transcranial magnetic stimulation protocols reveal a pattern of inhibition and facilitation in the human parietal cortex. J Physiol 529(2):461–468CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Penfield W, Rasmussen T (1950) The cerebral cortex of man; a clinical study of localization of function. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Reed CL, Farah MJ (1995) The psychological reality of the body schema - a test with normal participants. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 21:334–343CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Roder B, Rosler F, Spence C (2004) Early vision impairs tactile perception in the blind. Curr Biol 14:121–124CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Roux FE, Boetto S, Sacko O, Chollet F, Tremoulet M (2003) Writing, calculating, and finger recognition in the region of the angular gyrus: a cortical stimulation study of Gerstmann syndrome. J Neurosurg 99:716–727PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Schilder P, Klein E (1935) Japanese Illusion and postural model of the body. J Ment Nerv Disord 70:241–263Google Scholar
  18. Spence C (2002) Multisensory attention and tactile information-processing. Behav Brain Res 135:57–64CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Spence C, Pavani F, Driver J (2000) Crossmodal links between vision and touch in covert endogenous spatial attention. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 26(4):1298–1319CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Spence C, Baddeley R, Zampini M, James R, Shore DI (2003) Multisensory temporal order judgments: when two locations are better than one. Percept Psychophys 65:318–328PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Taylor-Clarke M, Jacobsen P, Haggard P (2004) Keeping the world a constant size: object constancy in human touch. Nat Neurosci 7(3):219–220CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Van-Riper C (1935) An experimental study of the Japanese illusion. Am J Psychol 47:252–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Weber EH (1834) The sense of touch. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar
  24. Wolpert DM, Goodbody SJ, Husain M (1998) Maintaining internal representations: the role of the human superior parietal lobe. Nat Neurosci 1:529–533CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Yamamoto S, Kitazawa S (2001a) Reversal of subjective temporal order due to arm crossing. Nat Neurosci 4:759–765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Yamamoto S, Kitazawa S (2001b) Sensation at the tips of invisible tools. Nat Neurosci 4:979–980CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Haggard
    • 1
  • Keiko Kitadono
    • 1
  • Clare Press
    • 1
  • Marisa Taylor-Clarke
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience and Department of PsychologyUniversity College LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations