Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 238, Issue 1, pp 153–169 | Cite as

The functional body: does body representation reflect functional properties?

  • Pietro CaggianoEmail author
  • Gianna Cocchini
Research Article
  • 92 Downloads

Abstract

There is a growing interest in the distortions of body representation in healthy population and most studies have focused their attention on specific parts of the body, such as the hands. Only three studies have considered the representation of the body as a whole. Findings, acquired by different means of assessment methods, are partially contrasting, leading to different interpretations. The present study aims to investigate which aspects of body representation can be preserved regardless of the method adopted and whether current and previous findings can be explained by a unique theoretical model. In Experiments 1a and 1b, we adopted a modified version of the Body Image Task to investigate body representations in real scale and the relationship of its parts. Participants judged the location of body landmarks by pointing on their own silhouette imagined on a wall in front of them. In Experiment 2, we investigated (i) whether the pattern of distortions observed in the first experiment are maintained across different methods by asking participants to estimate the veracity and proportionality of the length of their own body parts; and (ii) whether similar distortions can be generalized to stereotypical representations. Overall, we observed a consistent pattern of distortions, whereby upper body limbs are underestimated and lower parts of the body are overestimated across all experiments and conditions. These findings are then interpreted as the result of a functional relationship between body parts and daily actions, which underlie a close modulation of body schema and body image. This interpretation offers a reconciliation of seemingly contradictory findings in the literature and supports to the co-construction model (Pitron et al. in Conscious Cognit 65:352–358, 2018).

Keywords

Body representation Body image Body schema Body action Bodily awareness Posture 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We like to thank Dr. Guido Org for providing the ‘avatar’ stimuli and Dr. Rebekah Jamieson-Craig for proof-reading our manuscript.

References

  1. Ambroziak KB, Tamè L, Longo MR (2018) Conceptual distortions of hand structure are robust to changes in stimulus information. Conscious Cogn 61:107–116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Anema HA, van Zandvoort MJ, de Haan EH, Kappelle LJ, de Kort PL, Jansen BP, Dijkerman HC (2009) A double dissociation between somatosensory processing for perception and action. Neuropsychologia 47(6):1615–1620PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnhoff FN, Mehl MC (1963) Body image deterioration in paraplegia. J Nervous Mental Disorders 137:88–92Google Scholar
  4. Bassolino M, Finisguerra A, Canzoneri E, Serino A, Pozzo T (2015) Dissociating effect of upper limb non-use and overuse on space and body representations. Neuropsychologia 70:385–392PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Berlucchi G, Aglioti S (2010) The body in the brain: neural bases of corporeal awareness. Exp Brain Res 200(1):25–35PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Botvinick M, Cohen J (1998) Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391:756PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Brozzoli C, Makin TR, Cardinali L, Holmes NP, Farnè A (2012) Peripersonal space: a multisensory interface for body-object interactions. In: Murray MM, Wallace MT (eds) The neural bases of multisensory processes. CRC Press/Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, p 2012Google Scholar
  8. Brozzoli C, Ehrsson HH, Farnè A (2014) Multisensory representation of the space near the hand: from perception to action and individual interactions. Neuroscientist 20:122–135PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Bruce V, Young A (1998) In the eye of the beholder: the science of face perception. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Buxbaum LJ, Coslett HB (2001) Specialised structural descriptions for human body parts: evidence from autotopagnosia. Cognitive Neuropsychol 18:289–306Google Scholar
  11. Canzoneri E, Ubaldi S, Rastelli V, Finisguerra A, Bassolino M, Serino A (2013) Tool-use reshapes the boundaries of body and peripersonal space representations. Exp Brain Res 228(1):25–42PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Cardinali L, Frassinetti F, Brozzoli C, Urquizar C, Roy AC, Farnè A (2009a) Tool-use induces morphological updating of the body schema. Curr Biol 19(12):R478–R479PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Cardinali L, Brozzoli C, Farnè A (2009b) Peripersonal space and body schema: two labels for the same concept? Brain Topogr 21:252–260PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cocchini G, Galligan T, Mora L, Kuhn G (2018) The magic hand: effect of expertise on representation of own hand. Q J Exp Psychol 71(11):2314–2324Google Scholar
  15. Costantini M, Ambrosini E, Scorolli C, Borghi AM (2011) When objects are close to me: affordances in the peripersonal space. Psychon Bull Rev 18:302–308.  https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-011-0054-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. D’Angelo M, di Pellegrino G, Seriani S, Gallina P, Frassinetti F (2018) The sense of agency shapes body schema and peripersonal space. Sci Rep 8(1):13847.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-32238-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. de Vignemont F (2010) Body schema and body image—Pros and cons. Neuropsychologia 48(3):669–680PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. de Vignemont F (2018) Mind the body. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  19. de Vignemont F, Majid A, Jola C, Haggard P (2009) Segmenting the body into parts: evidence from biases in tactile perception. Q J Exp Psychol 62(3):500–512.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802000802 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Dijkerman HC, de Haan EH (2007) Somatosensory processes subserving perception and action. Behav Brain Sci 30:189–201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Faul F, Erdfelder E, Buchner A, Lang A-G (2009) Statistical power analyses using G*Power 31: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behav Res Methods 41(4):1149–1160PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Ferretti G (2016) Through the forest of motor representations. Conscious Cogn 43:177–196PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Fuentes CT, Longo MR, Haggard P (2013a) Body image distortions in healthy adults. Acta Physiol (Oxf) 144:344–351Google Scholar
  24. Fuentes CT, Pazzaglia M, Longo MR, Scivoletto G, Haggard P (2013b) Body image distortions following spinal cord injury. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 84(2):201–207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gallagher S (1986) Body image and body schema: a conceptual clarification. J Mind Behav 7:541–554Google Scholar
  26. Gallagher S (2005) How the body shapes the mind. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  27. Ganea N, Longo MR (2017) Projecting the self outside the body: body representations underlying proprioceptive imagery. Cognition 162:41–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.01.021 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Head H, Holmes G (1911) Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain 34:102–254Google Scholar
  29. Holmes NP, Spence C (2004) The body schema and multisensory representation(s) of peripersonal space. Cogn Process 5:94–105PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Irvine KR, McCarty K, McKenzie KJ, Pollet TV, Cornelissen KK, Tovée MJ, Cornelissen PL (2019) Distorted body image influences body schema in individuals with negative bodily attitudes. Neuropsychologia 122:38–50PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Kammers MP, de Vignemont F, Verhagen L, Dijkerman HC (2009) The rubber hand illusion in action. Neuropsychologia 47:204–211PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Lackner JR (1988) Some proprioceptive influences on the perceptual representation of body shape and orientation. Brain 111:281–297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Linkenauger SA, Wong HY, Geuss M, Stefanucci JK, McCulloch KC, Bülthoff HH, Mohler BJ, Proffitt DR (2015) The perceptual homunculus: the perception of the relative proportions of the human body. J Exp Psychol Gen 144(1):103–113PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Longo MR (2016) Types of body representation. In: Coello Y, Fischer MH (eds) Foundations of embodied cognition: Perceptual and emotional embodiment, vol 1. Routledge, London, pp 117–134Google Scholar
  35. Longo MR, Haggard P (2010) An implicit body representation underlying human position sense. PNAS Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:11727–11732.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1003483107 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Longo MR, Haggard P (2011) Weber’s illusion and body shape: anisotropy of tactile size perception on the hand. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 37:720–726.  https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021921 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Longo MR, Haggard P (2012a) A 2.5-D representation of the human hand. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 38:9–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Longo MR, Haggard P (2012b) Implicit body representations and the conscious body image. Acta Physiol (Oxf) 141:164–168.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.07.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Longo MR, Azañón E, Haggard P (2010) More than skin deep: body representation beyond primary somatosensory cortex. Neuropsychologia 48(3):655–668PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Mancini F, Longo MR, Iannetti GD, Haggard P (2011) A supramodal representation of the body surface. Neuropsychologia 49:1194–1201PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Mora L, Cowie D, Banissy MJ, Cocchini G (2018) My true face: unmasking one’s own face representation. Acta Physiol (Oxf) 191:63–68Google Scholar
  42. O’Shaughnessy B (1980) The will: a dual aspect theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 273–282Google Scholar
  43. Pitron V, de Vignemont F (2017) Beyond differences between the body schema and the body image: insights from body hallucinations. Conscious Cogn 53:115–121PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Pitron A, Alsmith A, de Vignemont F (2018) How do the body schema and the body image interact? Conscious Cogn 65(2018):352–358PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Ramachandran VS, Hirstein W (1998) The perception of phantom limbs. Brain 121:1603–1630PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Reed CL, McGoldrick JE, Shackelford R, Fidopiastis C (2004) Are human bodies represented differently from other animate and inanimate objects? Vis Cognit 11:523–550Google Scholar
  47. Reed CL, Stone VE, Grubb JD, McGoldrick JE (2006) Turning configural processing upside down: part and whole body postures. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 32(1):73PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Romano D, Uberti E, Caggiano P, Cocchini G, Maravita A (2018) Different tool training induces specific effects on body metric representation. Exp Brain Res 237(2):493–501PubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Sadibolova R, Ferrè ER, Linkenauger SA, Longo MR (2019) Distortions of perceived volume and length of body parts. Cortex 111:74–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Schwoebel J, Coslett HB (2005) Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. J Cognit Neurosci 17:543–553Google Scholar
  51. Sirigu A, Grafman J, Bressler K, Sunderland T (1991) Multiple representations contribute to body knowledge processing. Evidence from a case of autotopagnosia. Brain 114:629–642PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. Skrzypek S, Wehmeier PM, Remschmidt H (2001) Body image assessment using body size estimation in recent studies on anorexia nervosa. A brief review. Euro Child Adolesc Psychiatry 10:215–221Google Scholar
  53. Sposito A, Bolognini N, Vallar G, Maravita A (2012) Extension of perceived arm length following tool-use: clues to plasticity of body metrics. Neuropsychologia 50(9):2187–2194PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Tamè L, Bumpus N, Linkenauger SA, Longo MR (2017) Distorted body representations are robust to differences in experimental instructions. Atten Percept Psychophys 79:1204–1216PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentGoldsmiths University of LondonLondonUK

Personalised recommendations