Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 236, Issue 2, pp 609–618 | Cite as

Anisotropy of lateral peripersonal space is linked to handedness

  • Lise Hobeika
  • Isabelle Viaud-Delmon
  • Marine Taffou
Research Article


The space immediately surrounding our bodies, i.e., peripersonal space (PPS), is a critical area for the interaction with the external world, be it to deal with imminent threat or to attain objects of interest. In the brain, a dedicated system codes PPS in motor terms for the purpose of action. Yet, humans have asymmetric motor abilities: the dominant hand has an advantage in term of movements’ precision and reaction time. Furthermore, spatial attention is asymmetric and seems to be linked to a right hemispheric dominance for spatial processing. Here, we tested whether handedness and attentional asymmetries impact the detection of a tactile stimulus when an irrelevant auditory stimulus is looming towards the individual from the right or left hemispace. We examined the distance at which sound started speeding up tactile detection to estimate the morphometry of peri-trunk PPS. Our results show that right-handers’ PPS is larger in the left than in the right hemispace, whereas left-handers’ PPS is symmetric. The expansion of right-handers’ PPS on the side of the non-dominant hand is coherent with a protective function of PPS. Left-handers’ symmetric PPS can be related to the symmetric request of their motor abilities induced by living in a right-handers’ world. These findings reveal that PPS is not uniform and suggest that general mechanisms of spatial processing as well as motor skills could play a role in the representation of peri-trunk PPS.


Multisensory integration Audio–tactile integration 3D sound Spatial perception Pseudoneglect Auditory perception 



This work was supported by the funding of Sorbonne Universités Investissements d’avenir, Emergence; and by the program Bettencourt of the FdV doctoral school (Ecole Doctorale Frontières du Vivant (FdV)—Programme Bettencourt). We are grateful to Emmanuel Fléty and Arnaud Recher for their help with the apparatus for tactile stimulation. We thank Olivier Warusfel for his help on the elaboration of spatialized auditory stimuli through binaural rendering. We thank Philippe Nivaggioli for his help during setup installation. We thank Cassandra Visconti for proofreading this manuscript for American English spelling.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing financial interest.


  1. Alais D, Newell FN, Mamassian P (2010) Multisensory processing in review: from physiology to behaviour. Seeing Perceiving 23:3–38. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Annett M (1970) The growth of manual preference and speed. Br J Psychol 61:545–558. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Aspell JE, Lavanchy T, Lenggenhager B, Blanke O (2010) Seeing the body modulates audiotactile integration. Eur J Neurosci 31:1868–1873. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bassolino M, Serino A, Ubaldi S, Làdavas E (2010) Everyday use of the computer mouse extends peripersonal space representation. Neuropsychologia 48:803–811. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bassolino M, Finisguerra A, Canzoneri E et al (2014) Dissociating effect of upper limb non-use and overuse on space and body representations. Neuropsychologia 70:1–9. Google Scholar
  6. Bertelson P, Aschersleben G (1998) Automatic visual bias of perceived auditory location. Psychon Bull Rev 5:482–489CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bremmer F, Schlack A, Shah NJ et al (2001) Polymodal motion processing in posterior parietal and premotor cortex: a human fMRI study strongly implies equivalencies between humans and monkeys. Neuron 29:287–296CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Bresciani J-P, Dammeier F, Ernst MO (2006) Vision and touch are automatically integrated for the perception of sequences of events. J Vis 6:554–564. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Brozzoli C, Gentile G, Petkova VI, Ehrsson HH (2011) fMRI Adaptation Reveals a Cortical Mechanism for the Coding of Space Near the Hand. J Neurosci 31:9023–9031. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Burke KA, Letsos A, Butler RA (1994) Asymmetric performances in binaural localization of sound in space. Neuropsychologia 32:1409–1417. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Camponogara I, Komeilipoor N, Cesari P (2015) When distance matters: Perceptual bias and behavioral response for approaching sounds in peripersonal and extrapersonal space. Neuroscience 304:101–108. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Canzoneri E, Magosso E, Serino A (2012) Dynamic sounds capture the boundaries of peripersonal space representation in humans. PLoS ONE 7:e44306. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. Canzoneri E, Marzolla M, Amoresano A et al (2013a) Amputation and prosthesis implantation shape body and peripersonal space representations. Sci Rep 3:2844. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. Canzoneri E, Ubaldi S, Rastelli V et al (2013b) Tool-use reshapes the boundaries of body and peripersonal space representations. Exp Brain Res 228:25–42. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Carnahan H (1998) Manual asymmetries in response to rapid target movement. Brain Cognit 37:237–253. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cowey A, Small M, Ellis S (1994) Left visuo-spatial neglect can be worse in far than in near space. Neuropsychologia 32:1059–1066. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. de Haan AM, Smit M, Van der Stigchel S, Dijkerman HC (2016) Approaching threat modulates visuotactile interactions in peripersonal space. Exp Brain Res 234:1875–1884. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. Dietz MJ, Friston KJ, Mattingley JB et al (2014) Effective connectivity reveals right-hemisphere dominance in audiospatial perception: implications for models of spatial neglect. J Neurosci 34:5003–5011. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. Dijkerman HC, Farnè A (2015) Sensorimotor and social aspects of peripersonal space. Neuropsychologia 70:309–312. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Dufour A, Touzalin P, Candas V (2007) Rightward shift of the auditory subjective straight ahead in right- and left-handed subjects. Neuropsychologia 45:447–453. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Farnè A, Iriki A, Làdavas E (2005) Shaping multisensory action-space with tools: Evidence from patients with cross-modal extinction. Neuropsychologia 43:238–248. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Farnè A, Serino A, Làdavas E (2007) Dynamic size-change of peri-hand space following tool-use: determinants and spatial characteristics revealed through cross-modal extinction. Cortex 43:436–443. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Finisguerra A, Canzoneri E, Serino A et al (2015) Moving sounds within the peripersonal space modulate the motor system. Neuropsychologia 70:421–428. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Flowers K (1975) Handedness and controlled movement. Br J Psychol 66:39–52. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Gentile G, Petkova VI, Ehrsson HH (2011) Integration of visual and tactile signals from the hand in the human brain: an FMRI study. J Neurophysiol 105:910–922. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gérin-Lajoie M, Richards CL, Fung J, McFadyen BJ (2008) Characteristics of personal space during obstacle circumvention in physical and virtual environments. Gait Posture 27:239–247. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Gonzalez CLR, Whitwell RL, Morrissey B et al (2007) Left handedness does not extend to visually guided precision grasping. Exp Brain Res 182:275–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Graziano MSA, Cooke DF (2006) Parieto-frontal interactions, personal space, and defensive behavior. Neuropsychologia 44:2621–2635. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 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
  30. Hall ET (1966) The hidden dimensionGoogle Scholar
  31. Halligan PW, Marshall JC (1991) Left neglect for near but not far space in man. Nature 350:498–500. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Hayduk L (1981) The shape of personal space: an experimental investigation. Can J Behav Sci 13:87–93. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Heilman KM, Van Den Abell T (1979) Right hemispheric dominance for mediating cerebral activation. Neuropsychologia 17:315–321. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Iachini T, Ruggiero G, Ruotolo F, Vinciguerra M (2014) Motor resources in peripersonal space are intrinsic to spatial encoding: evidence from motor interference. Acta Psychol (Amst) 153:20–27. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kandula M, Van der Stoep N, Hofman D, Dijkerman HC (2017) On the contribution of overt tactile expectations to visuo-tactile interactions within the peripersonal space. Exp Brain Res 235:2511–2522. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. Kerr M, Rosemary M, Elithorn A (1963) Cerebral dominance in reaction time responses. Br J Psychol 54:325–336. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Krumbholz K, Schönwiesner M, Von Cramon DY et al (2005) Representation of interaural temporal information from left and right auditory space in the human planum temporale and inferior parietal lobe. Cereb Cortex 15:317–324. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Krumbholz K, Hewson-Stoate N, Schönwiesner M (2007) Cortical response to auditory motion suggests an asymmetry in the reliance on inter-hemispheric connections between the left and right auditory cortices. J Neurophysiol 97:1649–1655. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Làdavas E, Farnè A (2004) Visuo-tactile representation of near-the-body space. J Physiol Paris 98:161–170CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Le Bigot N, Grosjean M (2012) Effects of handedness on visual sensitivity in perihand space. PLoS ONE. Google Scholar
  41. Linkenauger S, Witt JK, Stefanucci JK et al (2009) The effects of handedness and reachability on perceived distance. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 35:1649–1660. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  42. Lloyd DM, Coates A, Knopp J et al (2009) Don’t stand so close to me: The effect of auditory input on interpersonal space. Perception 38:617–620. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Longo MR, Lourenco SF (2006) On the nature of near space: effects of tool use and the transition to far space. Neuropsychologia 44:977–981. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Longo MR, Lourenco SF (2007) Space perception and body morphology: extent of near space scales with arm length. Exp Brain Res 177:285–290. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Lourenco SF, Longo MR (2009) The plasticity of near space: evidence for contraction. Cognition 112:451–456. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Luce RD (1986) Response times: their role in inferring elementary mental organization (no. 8), Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  47. Maister L, Cardini F, Zamariola G et al (2015) Your place or mine: Shared sensory experiences elicit a remapping of peripersonal space. Neuropsychologia 70:455–461. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Makin TR, Holmes NP, Zohary E (2007) Is that near my hand? Multisensory representation of peripersonal space in human intraparietal sulcus. J Neurosci 27:731–740. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Mamolo CM, Roy E, Rohr LE, Bryden PJ (2006) Reaching patterns across working space: the effects of handedness, task demands, and comfort levels. Laterality 11:465–492. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Maravita A, Iriki A (2004) Tools for the body (schema). Trends Cognit Sci 8:79–86. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Marchant LF, McGrew WC, Eibl-Eibesfeldt I (1995) Is human handedness universal? Ethological analyses from three traditional cultures. Ethology 101:239–258. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McGlone J, Davidson W (1973) The relation between cerebral speech laterality and spatial ability with special reference to sex and hand preference. Neuropsychologia 11:105–113. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. Michaels CF (1988) S-R compatibility between response position and destination of apparent motion: evidence of the detection of affordances. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 14:231–240. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. Nicholls MER, Thomas NA, Loetscher T, Grimshaw GM (2013) The flinders handedness survey (FLANDERS): a brief measure of skilled hand preference. Cortex 49:2914–2926. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Noel J-P, Grivaz P, Marmaroli P et al (2015) Full body action remapping of peripersonal space: the case of walking. Neuropsychologia 70:375–384. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. Ocklenburg S, Hirnstein M, Hausmann M, Lewald J (2010) Auditory space perception in left- and right-handers. Brain Cognit 72:210–217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Quesque F, Ruggiero G, Mouta S et al (2016) Keeping you at arm’s length: modifying peripersonal space influences interpersonal distance. Psychol Res. PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. Railo H, Tallus J, Hämäläinen H (2011) Right visual field advantage for perceived contrast: correlation with an auditory bias and handedness. Brain Cognit 77:391–400. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Raymond M, Pontier D, Dufour A-B, Pape Moller A (1996) Frequency-dependent maintenance of left handedness in humans. Proc R Soc Lond B 263:1627–1633CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Reuter-Lorenz P, Kinsbourne M, Moscovitch M (1990) Hemispheric control of spatial attention. Brain Cognit 266:240–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Rizzolatti G, Fadiga L, Fogassi L, Gallese V (1997) The space around us. Science 277:190–191CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Sambo CF, Iannetti GD (2013) Better safe than sorry? The safety margin surrounding the body is increased by anxiety. J Neurosci 33:14225–14230. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Savel S (2009) Individual differences and left/right asymmetries in auditory space perception. I. Localization of low-frequency sounds in free field. Hear Res 255:142–154. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Serino A (2016) Variability in multisensory responses predicts the self-space. Trends Cognit Sci 20:169–170. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Serino A, Bassolino M, Farnè A, Làdavas E (2007) Extended multisensory space in blind cane users. Psychol Sci 18:642–648. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. Serino A, Canzoneri E, Avenanti A (2011) Fronto-parietal areas necessary for a multisensory representation of peripersonal space in humans: an rTMS study. J Cognit Neurosci 23:2956–2967. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Serino A, Noel J-P, Galli G et al (2015) Body part-centered and full body-centered peripersonal space representation. Sci Rep. PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. Spence C, Pavani F, Driver J (2004a) Spatial constraints on visual-tactile cross-modal distractor congruency effects. Cognit Affect Behav Neurosci 4:148–169. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Spence C, Pavani F, Maravita A, Holmes NP (2004b) Multisensory contributions to the 3-D representation of visuotactile peripersonal space in humans: evidence from the crossmodal congruency task. J Physiol Paris 98:171–189. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. Taffou M, Viaud-Delmon I (2014) Cynophobic fear adaptively extends peri-personal space. Front Psychiatry 5:3–9. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Ulrich R, Miller J (1993) Information processing models generating lognormally distributed reaction times. J Math Psychol 37(4):513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Vagnoni E, Andreanidou V, Lourenco SF, Longo MR (2017) Action ability modulates time-to-collision judgments. Exp Brain Res 1–11.
  73. Viaud-Delmon I, Brugger P, Landis T (2007) Hemineglect: Take a look at the back space. Ann Neurol 62:418–422. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Vogel JJ, Bowers CA, Vogel DS (2003) Cerebral lateralization of spatial abilities: a meta-analysis. Brain Cognit 52:197–204. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zahorik P, Brungart DS, Bronkhorst AW (2005) Auditory distance perception in humans: a summary of past and present research. 91:pp 409–420Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lise Hobeika
    • 1
  • Isabelle Viaud-Delmon
    • 1
  • Marine Taffou
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Sorbonne Universite, CNRS, IRCAM, Sciences et Technologies de la Musique et du Son, UMR 9912ParisFrance
  2. 2.Institut de Recherche Biomédicale des ArméesBrétigny-sur-OrgeFrance

Personalised recommendations