Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 166, Issue 3–4, pp 489–497 | Cite as

Visual bias of unseen hand position with a mirror: spatial and temporal factors

  • Nicholas P. HolmesEmail author
  • Charles Spence
Research Article

Abstract

Two experiments examined the integration of visual and proprioceptive information concerning the location of an unseen hand, using a mirror positioned along the midsagittal plane. In experiment 1, participants tapped the fingers of both hands in synchrony, while viewing the mirror-reflection of their left hand. After 6 s, participants made reaching movements to a target with their unseen right hand behind the mirror. Reaches were accurate when visually and proprioceptively specified hand positions were congruent prior to the reach, but significantly biased by vision when the visual location conflicted with the real location. This effect was independent of the target location and depended strongly upon the relative position of the mirror-reflected hand. In experiment 2, participants made reaching movements following 4, 8, or 12 s active visuomotor or passive visual exposure to the mirror, or following passive exposure without the mirror. Reaching was biased more by the visual location following active visuomotor compared to passive visual exposure, and this bias increased with the duration of visual exposure. These results suggest that the felt position of the hand depends upon an integrated, weighted sum of visual and proprioceptive information. Visual information is weighted more strongly under active visuomotor than passive visual exposure, and with increasing exposure duration to the mirror reflected hand.

Keywords

Multisensory Proprioception Reaching Visual capture Mirror box 

Notes

Acknowledgements

N.P.H. was supported by a Wellcome Prize Studentship (number 065696/Z/01/A) from The Wellcome Trust.

References

  1. Altschuler EL, Wisdom SB, Stone L, Foster C, Galasko D, Llewellyn DM, Ramachandran VS (1999) Rehabilitation of hemiparesis after stroke with a mirror. Lancet 353:2035–2036Google Scholar
  2. Balslev D, Christensen LOD, Lee JH, Law I, Paulson OB, Miall RC (2004) Enhanced accuracy in novel mirror drawing after repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation-induced proprioceptive deafferentation. J Neurosci 24:9698–9702Google Scholar
  3. van Beers RJ, Sittig AC, Denier van der Gon JJ (1998) The precision of proprioceptive position sense. Exp Brain Res 122:367–377Google Scholar
  4. van Beers RJ, Sittig AC, Denier van der Gon JJ (1999a) Integration of proprioceptive and visual position-information: an experimentally supported model. J Neurophysiol 81:1355–1364Google Scholar
  5. van Beers RJ, Sittig AC, Denier van der Gon JJ (1999b) Localization of a seen finger is based exclusively on proprioception and on vision of the finger. Exp Brain Res 125:43–49Google Scholar
  6. van Beers RJ, Wolpert DM, Haggard P (2002) When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Curr Biol 12:834–837Google Scholar
  7. Binkofski F, Buccino G, Dohle C, Seitz RJ, Freund H (1999) Mirror agnosia and mirror ataxia constitute different parietal lobe disorders. Ann Neurol 46:51–61Google Scholar
  8. Brown LE, Rosenbaum CP, Sainburg RL (2003) Movement speed effects on limb position drift. Exp Brain Res 153:266–274Google Scholar
  9. Burnett CT (1904) Studies in the influence of abnormal position upon the motor impulse. Psychol Rev 11:370–394Google Scholar
  10. Canon LK (1970) Intermodality inconsistency of input and directed attention as determinants of the nature of adaptation. J Exp Psychol 84:141–147Google Scholar
  11. Canon LK (1971) Directed attention and maladaptive “adaptation” to displacement of the visual field. J Exp Psychol 88:403–408Google Scholar
  12. Chokron S, Colliot P, Atzeni T, Bartolomeo P, Ohlmann T (2004) Active versus passive proprioceptive straight-ahead pointing in normal subjects. Brain Cogn 55:290–294Google Scholar
  13. Clower DM, Hoffmann JM, Votaw JR, Faber TL, Woods RP, Alexander GE (1996) Role of posterior parietal cortex in the recalibration of visually guided reaching. Nature 383:618–621Google Scholar
  14. Desmurget M, Rossetti YKK, Prablanc C, Stelmach GE, Jeannerod M (1995) Representation of hand position prior to movement and motor variability. Can J Physiol Pharmacol 73:262–272Google Scholar
  15. Desmurget M, Rossetti YKK, Jordan M, Meckler C, Prablanc C (1997) Viewing the hand prior to movement improves accuracy of pointing performed toward the unseen contralateral hand. Exp Brain Res 115:180–186Google Scholar
  16. Efstathiou E (1969) Effects of exposure time and magnitude of prism transform on eye-hand coordination. J Exp Psychol 81:235–240Google Scholar
  17. Ehrsson HH, Spence C, Passingham RE (2004) That’s my hand! Activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb. Science 305:875–877Google Scholar
  18. Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 412:429–433Google Scholar
  19. Ernst MO, Bülthoff HH (2004) Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends Cogn Sci 8:162–169Google Scholar
  20. Franz EA, Packman T (2004) Fooling the brain into thinking it sees both hands moving enhances bimanual spatial coupling. Exp Brain Res 157:174–180Google Scholar
  21. Grafton ST, Mazziotta JC, Woods RP, Phelps ME (1992) Human functional anatomy of visually guided finger movements. Brain 115:565–587Google Scholar
  22. Graziano MSA (1999) Where is my arm? The relative role of vision and proprioception in the neuronal representation of limb position. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 96:10418–10421Google Scholar
  23. Gregory RL (1996) Mirrors in mind. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Haggard P, Newman CS, Blundell J, Andrew H (2000) The perceived position of the hand in space. Percept Psychophys 62:363–377Google Scholar
  25. Harris CS (1965) Perceptual adaptation to inverted, reversed and displaced vision. Psychol Rev 72:419–444Google Scholar
  26. Hay JC, Pick HL Jr, Ikeda K (1965) Visual capture produced by prism spectacles. Psychon Sci 2:215–216Google Scholar
  27. Holmes NP, Spence C (2004) The body schema and multisensory representation(s) of peripersonal space. Cognit Proc 5:94–105Google Scholar
  28. Holmes NP, Crozier G, Spence C (2004) When mirrors lie: “visual capture” of arm position impairs reaching performance. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4:193–200Google Scholar
  29. Jackson CV, Zangwill OL (1953) Experimental finger dyspraxia. Q J Exp Psychol 4:1–10Google Scholar
  30. Kelso JAS, Cook E, Olson ME, Epstein W (1975) Allocation of attention and the locus of adaptation to displaced vision. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1:237–245Google Scholar
  31. Lajoie Y, Paillard J, Teasdale N, Bard C, Fleury M, Forget R, Lamarre Y (1992) Mirror drawing in a deafferented patient and normal subjects: visuoproprioceptive conflict. Neurology 42:1104–1106Google Scholar
  32. Lateiner JE, Sainburg RL (2003) Differential contributions of vision and proprioception to movement accuracy. Exp Brain Res 151:446–454Google Scholar
  33. Lloyd DM, Shore DI, Spence C, Calvert GA (2003) Multisensory representation of limb position in human premotor cortex. Nat Neurosci 6:17–18Google Scholar
  34. Mon-Williams M, Wann JP, Jenkinson M, Rushton K (1997) Synaesthesia in the normal limb. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 264:1007–1010Google Scholar
  35. Nielsen TI (1963) Volition: a new experimental approach. Scand J Psychol 4:225–230Google Scholar
  36. Pick HL Jr, Warren DH, Hay JC (1969) Sensory conflict in judgments of spatial direction. Percept Psychophys 6:203–205Google Scholar
  37. Plooy A, Tresilian JR, Mon-Williams M, Wann JP (1998) The contribution of vision and proprioception to judgements of finger proximity. Exp Brain Res 118:415–420Google Scholar
  38. Ramachandran VS, Rogers-Ramachandran D, Cobb S (1995) Touching the phantom limb. Nature 377:489–490Google Scholar
  39. Ramachandran VS, Rogers-Ramachandran D (1996) Synaesthesia in phantom limbs induced with mirrors. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 263:377–386Google Scholar
  40. Ramachandran VS, Altschuler EL, Hillyer S (1997) Mirror agnosia. Proc R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 264:645–647Google Scholar
  41. Ro T, Wallace R, Hagedorn JC, Farnè A, Pienkos E (2004) Visual enhancing of tactile perception in posterior parietal cortex. J Cogn Neurosci 16:24–30Google Scholar
  42. Rossetti Y, Desmurget M, Prablanc C (1995) Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both? J Neurophys 74:457–463Google Scholar
  43. Sathian K, Greenspan AI, Wolf SL (2000) Doing it with mirrors: a case study of a novel approach to neurorehabilitation. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 14:73–76Google Scholar
  44. Shimojo S (1987) Attention-dependent visual capture in double vision. Perception 16:445–447Google Scholar
  45. Smyrnis N, Gourtzelidis P, Evdokimidis I (2000) A systematic directional error in 2-D arm movements increases with increasing delay between visual target presentation and movement execution. Exp Brain Res 131:111–120Google Scholar
  46. Wann JP, Ibrahim SF (1992) Does limb proprioception drift? Exp Brain Res 91:162–166Google Scholar
  47. Welch RB (1971) Prism adaptation: the “target-pointing effect” as a function of exposure trials. Percept Psychophys 9:102–104Google Scholar
  48. Welch RB (1972) The effect of experienced limb identity upon adaptation to simulated displacement of the visual field. Percept Psychophys 12:453–456Google Scholar
  49. Welch RB, Widawski MH, Harrington J, Warren DH (1979) An examination of the relationship between visual capture and prism adaptation. Percept Psychophys 25:126–132Google Scholar
  50. Wertheimer M, Arena AJ (1959) Effect of exposure time on adaptation to disarranged hand-eye coordination. Percept Mot Skills 9:159–164Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyOxford UniversityOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations