4.7 Article

Congruence-based contextual plausibility modulates cortical activity during vibrotactile perception in virtual multisensory environments

期刊

COMMUNICATIONS BIOLOGY
卷 5, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s42003-022-04318-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. German Research Foundation (DFG, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft) as part of Germany's Excellence Strategy [EXC 2050/1, 390696704]
  2. Technische Universitat Dresden

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates how congruence cues and congruence-based expectations shape perception in virtual reality (VR) by assessing brain responses during vehicle riding experiences in VR scenarios. The results suggest that plausible scenarios elicit greater cortical responses, and weaker but plausible stimulations result in greater responses in the sensorimotor cortex.
How congruence cues and congruence-based expectations may together shape perception in virtual reality (VR) still need to be unravelled. We linked the concept of plausibility used in VR research with congruence-based modulation by assessing brain responses while participants experienced vehicle riding experiences in VR scenarios. Perceptual plausibility was manipulated by sensory congruence, with multisensory stimulations confirming with common expectations of road scenes being plausible. We hypothesized that plausible scenarios would elicit greater cortical responses. The results showed that: (i) vibrotactile stimulations at expected intensities, given embedded audio-visual information, engaged greater cortical activities in frontal and sensorimotor regions; (ii) weaker plausible stimulations resulted in greater responses in the sensorimotor cortex than stronger but implausible stimulations; (iii) frontal activities under plausible scenarios negatively correlated with plausibility violation costs in the sensorimotor cortex. These results potentially indicate frontal regulation of sensory processing and extend previous evidence of contextual modulation to the tactile sense.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据