Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 201, Issue 3, pp 411–419 | Cite as

Gating of vibrotactile detection during visually guided bimanual reaches

  • Gavin Buckingham
  • David P. Carey
  • Francisco L. Colino
  • John deGrosbois
  • Gordon Binsted
Research Article

Abstract

It is far more difficult to detect a small tactile stimulation on a finger that is moving compared to when it is static. This suppression of tactile information during motion, known as tactile gating, has been examined in some detail during single-joint movements. However, the existence and time course of this gating has yet to be examined during visually guided multi-joint reaches, where sensory feedback may be paramount. The current study demonstrated that neurologically intact humans are unable to detect a small vibratory stimulus on one of their index fingers during a bimanual reach toward visual targets. By parametrically altering the delay between the visual target onset and the vibration, it was demonstrated that this gating was even apparent before participants started moving. A follow up experiment using electromyography indicated that gating was likely to occur even before muscle activity had taken place. This unique demonstration of tactile gating during a task reliant on visual feedback supports the notion this phenomenon is due to a central command, rather than a masking of sensory signals by afferent processing during movement.

Keywords

Tactile gating Bimanual reaching Multisensory integration Perception and action 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Dr. Matt Heath for his thought-provoking discussions on this topic. This work was supported by a 6th Century Ph.D. studentship from the College of Life Sciences and Medicine at the University of Aberdeen, and a postdoctoral research fellowship from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) Canada, awarded to G Buckingham. G Binsted was funded by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC).

Supplementary material

221_2009_2050_MOESM1_ESM.doc (37 kb)
Supplementary material (DOC 37 kb)

References

  1. Bays PM, Flanagan JR, Wolpert DM (2006) Attenuation of self-generated tactile sensations is predictive, not postdictive. PLoS Biol 4:e28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Buckingham G, Carey DP (2009) Rightward biases during bimanual reaching. Exp Brain Res 194:197–206CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Cavanagh PR, Komi PV (1979) Electromechanical delay in human skeletal muscle under concentric and eccentric contractions. Eur J Appl Physiol 42:159–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chapman CE, Bushnell MC, Miron D, Duncan GH, Lund JP (1987) Sensory perception during movement in man. Exp Brain Res 68:516–524CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Dijkerman HC, de Haan EHF (2007) Somatosensory processes subserving perception and action. Behav Brain Sci. 30:189–239CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Flanagan JR, Beltzner MA (2000) Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size-weight illusion. Nat Neurosci 3:737–741CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Flanagan JR, Bowman MC, Johansson RS (2006) Control strategies in object manipulation tasks. Exp Brain Res 16:1–10Google Scholar
  8. Gescheider G (1997) Psychophysics: the fundamentals, 3rd edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, NJGoogle Scholar
  9. Goodale MA, Milner AD (1992) Separate visual pathways for perception and action. Trends Neurosci 15:20–25CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodale MA, Pellison D, Prablanc C (1986) Large adjustments in visually guided reaching do not depend on vision of the hand or perception of target displacement. Nature. 320:748–750CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Gordon AM, Forssberg H, Johansson RS, Westling G (1991) Integration of sensory information during the programming of precision grip: comments on the contributions of size cues. Exp Brain Res 85:226–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Guiard Y (1987) Asymmetric division of labour in human skilled bimanual action: the kinematic chain as a model. J Mot Behav 19:486–517PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Hartcher-O’Brien J, Gallace A, Krings B, Koppen C, Spence C (2006) When vision ‘extinguishes’ touch in neurologically-normal people: extending the Colavita visual dominance effect. Exp Brain Res 186:643–658CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Jiang W, Chapman CE, Lamarre Y (1990) Modulation of somatosensory evoked responses in the primary somatosensory cortex produced by intracortical microstimulation of the motor cortex in the monkey. Exp Brain Res 80:333–344CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Klatzky RL, Lederman SL (2007) Do intention and exploration modulate the pathways to haptic object identification? Behav Brain Sci. 30:213–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nickerson RS (1974) Intersensory facilitation of reaction time. Psychol Rev 80:489–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ohtsuki T (1994) Change in strength, speed, and reaction time induced by simultaneous bilateral muscle activity. In: Swinnen SP, Heuer H, Massion J, Cesaer P (eds) Interlimb coordination: neural dynamical and cognitive constraints. Academic press, NY, pp 259–274Google Scholar
  18. Rao AK, Gordon AM (2001) Contribution of tactile information to accuracy in pointing movements. Exp Brain Res 138:438–445CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Viitasalo J, Komi P (1981) Interrelationships between electromyographic, mechanical, muscle structure and reflex time measurements in man. Acta Physiol Scand 111:97–103CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Voss M, Ingram JN, Haggard P, Wolpert DM (2006) Sensorimotor attenuation by central motor command signals in the absence of movement. Nat Neurosci 19:26–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Voss M, Ingram JN, Wolpert DM, Haggard P (2008) Mere expectation to move causes attenuation of sensory signals. PLoS ONE 3:e2866. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0002866 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Walsh E, Haggard P (2007) The internal structure of stopping revealed by a sensory detection task. Exp Brain Res 183:405–410CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Williams SR, Chapman CE (2002) Time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection in humans III. Effect of motor tasks. J Neurophysiol 88:1968–1979CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Williams SR, Shenasa J, Chapman CE (1998) Time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection in humans. I. Importance of stimulus location. J Neurophysiol 79:947–963PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Wolpert DM, Flanagan JR (2001) Motor prediction. Curr Biol 18:R729–R732CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gavin Buckingham
    • 1
    • 2
  • David P. Carey
    • 2
  • Francisco L. Colino
    • 3
  • John deGrosbois
    • 3
  • Gordon Binsted
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of Western OntarioLondonCanada
  2. 2.School of PsychologyUniversity of AberdeenAberdeenUK
  3. 3.Faculty of Health and Social DevelopmentUniversity of British ColumbiaOkanaganCanada

Personalised recommendations