4.5 Review

Prosthetic embodiment: systematic review on definitions, measures, and experimental paradigms

Journal

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12984-022-01006-6

Keywords

Embodiment; Prosthetics; Ownership; Agency; Body representation; Phenomenology

Funding

  1. Chalmers University of Technology
  2. Promobilia Foundation
  3. IngaBritt and Arne Lundbergs Foundation
  4. Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsradet)
  5. Swedish Innovation Agency (VINNOVA)
  6. European Research Council (DeTOP project)
  7. European Research Council (GRAFIN project)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The term embodiment is widely used in prosthetics research but often lacks clear definition. This hinders the comparison of studies using embodiment as a metric and impedes the advancement of prosthetics research. By systematically reviewing the definitions of embodiment, we found that it is often conceptualized based on body representations or experimental phenomenology. Treating prosthetic embodiment as the combination of ownership and agency allows for quantifiable measurement. Recommendations on metrics for outcome comparisons were provided for further discussions in prosthetics research.
The term embodiment has become omnipresent within prosthetics research and is often used as a metric of the progress made in prosthetic technologies, as well as a hallmark for user acceptance. However, despite the frequent use of the term, the concept of prosthetic embodiment is often left undefined or described incongruently, sometimes even within the same article. This terminological ambiguity complicates the comparison of studies using embodiment as a metric of success, which in turn hinders the advancement of prosthetics research. To resolve these terminological ambiguities, we systematically reviewed the used definitions of embodiment in the prosthetics literature. We performed a thematic analysis of the definitions and found that embodiment is often conceptualized in either of two frameworks based on body representations or experimental phenomenology. We concluded that treating prosthetic embodiment within an experimental phenomenological framework as the combination of ownership and agency allows for embodiment to be a quantifiable metric for use in translational research. To provide a common reference and guidance on how to best assess ownership and agency, we conducted a second systematic review, analyzing experiments and measures involving ownership and agency. Together, we highlight a pragmatic definition of prosthetic embodiment as the combination of ownership and agency, and in an accompanying article, we provide a perspective on a multi-dimensional framework for prosthetic embodiment. Here, we concluded by providing recommendations on metrics that allow for outcome comparisons between studies, thereby creating a common reference for further discussions within prosthetics research.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available