4.5 Article

Action preparation modulates sensory perception in unseen personal space: An electrophysiological investigation

期刊

NEUROPSYCHOLOGIA
卷 89, 期 -, 页码 445-452

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2016.07.021

关键词

Action; Perception; Visual; Tactile; Personal; Body

资金

  1. Economic and Social Research Council [1466430] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Behavioural and electrophysiological evidence has demonstrated that preparation of goal-directed actions modulates sensory perception at the goal location before the action is executed. However, previous studies have focused on sensory perception in areas of peripersonal space. The present study investigated visual and tactile sensory processing at the goal location of upcoming movements towards the body, much of which is not visible, as well as visible peripersonal space. A motor task cued participants to prepare a reaching movement towards goals either in peripersonal space in front of them or personal space on the upper chest. In order to assess modulations of sensory perception during movement preparation, event-related potentials (ERPs) were recorded in response to task-irrelevant visual and tactile probe stimuli delivered randomly at one of the goal locations of the movements. In line with previous neurophysiological findings, movement preparation modulated visual processing at the goal of a movement in peripersonal space. Movement preparation also modulated somatosensory processing at the movement goal in personal space. The findings demonstrate that tactile perception in personal space is subject to similar top-down sensory modulation by motor preparation as observed for visual stimuli presented in peripersonal space. These findings show for the first time that the principles and mechanisms underlying adaptive modulation of sensory processing in the context of action extend to tactile perception in unseen personal space. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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