LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Gherri, E.; Forster, B. (2014)
Publisher: Frontiers Research Foundation
Journal: Frontiers in Psychology
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Eye position, Event-Related Potentials., Endogenous Tactile Attention, Psychology, Somatotopic and external space, BF, Original Research Article, BF1-990, somatosensory processing, event-related potentials
Attentional selectivity in touch is modulated by the position of the body in external space. For instance, during endogenous attention tasks in which tactile stimuli are presented to the hands, the effect of attention is reduced when the hands are placed far apart than when they are close together and when the hands are crossed as compared to when they are placed in their anatomical position. This suggests that both somatotopic and external spatial reference frames coding the hands’ locations contribute to the spatial selection of the relevant hand. Here we investigate whether tactile selection of hands is also modulated by the position of other body parts, not directly involved in tactile perception, such as eye-in-orbit (gaze direction). We asked participants to perform the same sustained tactile attention task while gazing laterally toward an eccentric fixation point (Eccentric gaze) or toward a central fixation point (Central gaze). Event-related potentials recorded in response to tactile non-target stimuli presented to the attended or unattended hand were compared as a function of gaze direction (Eccentric vs. Central conditions). Results revealed that attentional modulations were reduced in the Eccentric gaze condition as compared to the Central gaze condition in the time range of the Nd component (200–260 ms post-stimulus), demonstrating for the first time that the attentional selection of one of the hands is affected by the position of the eye in the orbit. Directing the eyes toward an eccentric position might be sufficient to create a misalignment between external and somatotopic frames of references reducing tactile attention. This suggests that the eye-in-orbit position contributes to the spatial selection of the task relevant body part.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Burton, H., Abend, N. S., MacLeod, A. M., Sinclair, R. J., Snyder, A. Z., and Raichle, M. E. (1999). Tactile attention tasks enhance activation in somatosensory regions of parietal cortex: a positron emission tomography study. Cereb. Cortex 9, 662- 674. doi: 10.1093/cercor/9.7.662
    • Desmedt, J. E., and Robertson, D. (1977). Differential enhancement of early and late components of the cerebral somatosensory evoked potentials during forced-paced cognitive tasks in man. J. Physiol. 271, 761-782.
    • Driver, J., and Grossenbacher, P. G. (1996). “Multimodal spatial constraints on tactile selective attention,” in Attention and Performance, XVI. eds T. Inui and J. L. McClelland (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), 209-236.
    • Eardley, A. F., and van Velzen, J. (2011). Event-related potential evidence for the use of external coordinates in the preparation of tactile attention by the early blind. Eur. J. Neurosci. 33, 1897-1907. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2011. 07672.x
    • Eimer, M., Cockburn, D., Smedley, B., and Driver, J. (2001). Cross-modal links in endogenous spatial attention are mediated by common external locations: evidence from event-related brain potentials. Exp. Brain Res. 139, 398-411. doi: 10.1007/s002210100773
    • Eimer, M., and Forster, B. (2003). Modulations of early somatosensory ERP components by transient and sustained spatial attention. Exp. Brain Res. 151, 24-31. doi: 10.1007/s00221-003-1437-1
    • Eimer, M., Forster, B., Fieger, A., and Harbich, S. (2004). Effects of hand posture on preparatory control processes and sensory modulations in tactilespatial attention. Clin. Neurophysiol. 115, 596-608. doi: 10.1016/j.clinph.2003. 10.015
    • Eimer, M., Forster, B., and Van Velzen, J. (2003). Anterior and posterior attentional control systems use different spatial reference frames: ERP evidence from covert tactile-spatial orienting. Psychophysiology 40, 924-933. doi: 10.1111/1469-8986.00110
    • Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., and Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: a flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behav. Res. Methods 39, 175-191. doi: 10.3758/BF03193146
    • Forster, B., and Eimer, M. (2004). The attentional selection of spatial and non-spatial attributes in touch: ERP evidence for parallel and independent processes. Biol. Psychol. 66, 1-20. doi: 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2003.08.001
    • García-Larrea, L., Lukaszewicz, A. C., and Mauguire, F. (1995). Somatosensory responses during selective spatial attention: the N120- to-N140 transition. Psychophysiology 32, 526-537. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1995.tb01229.x
    • Gherri, E., and Forster, B. (2012a). Crossing the hands disrupts tactile spatial attention but not motor attention: evidence from event-related potentials. Neuropsychologia 50, 2303-2316. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012. 05.034
    • Gherri, E., and Forster, B. (2012b). ERP investigations into the effects of gaze and spatial attention on the processing of tactile events. Seeing Perceiving 25, 146-146. doi: 10.1163/187847612X647784
    • Gillmeister, H., Adler, J., and Forster, B. (2010). Object-guided spatial attention in touch: holding the same object with both hands delays attentional selection. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 931-942. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2009.21265
    • Gillmeister, H., and Forster, B. (2012). Hands behind your back: effects of arm posture on tactile attention in the space behind the body. Exp. Brain Res. 216, 489-497. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2953-z
    • Harrar, V., and Harris, L. R. (2009). Eye position affects the perceived location of touch. Exp. Brain Res. 198, 403-410. doi: 10.1007/s00221-009-1884-4
    • Heed, T., and Röder, B. (2010). Common anatomical and external coding for hands and feet in tactile attention: evidence from event-related potentials. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 22, 184-202. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.21168
    • Ho, C., and Spence, C. (2007). Head orientation biases tactile localization. Brain Res. 1144C, 136-141. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2007.01.091
    • Jones, A., and Forster, B. (2013). Independent effects of endogenous and exogenous attention in touch. Somatosens. Mot. Res. 30, 161-166. doi: 10.3109/08990220.2013.779243
    • Kaas, J. H. (1983). What, if anything, is SI? Organization of first somatosensory area of cortex. Physiol. Rev. 63, 206-231.
    • Medina, J., and Coslett, H. B. (2010). From maps to form to space: touch and the body schema. Neuropsychologia 48, 645-654. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.08.017
    • Merzenich, M. M., Kaas, J. H., Sur, M., and Lin, C. S. (1978). Double representation of the body surface within cytoarchitectonic areas 3b and 1 in “SI” in the owl monkey (Aotus trivirgatus). J. Comp. Neurol. 181, 41-73. doi: 10.1002/cne.901810104
    • Michie, P. T. (1984). Selective attention effects on somatosensory event-related potentials. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 425, 250-255. doi: 10.1111/j.1749- 6632.1984.tb23542.x
    • Michie, P. T., Bearpark, H. M., Crawford, J. M., and Glue, L. C. T. (1987). The effects of spatial selective attention on the somatosensory event-related potential. Psychophysiology 24, 449-463. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.1987.tb00316.x
    • Mima, T., Nagamine, T., Nakamura, K., and Shibasaki, H. (1998). Attention modulates both primary and second somatosensory cortical activities in humans: a magnetoencephalographic study. J. Neurophysiol. 80, 2215-2221.
    • Mueller, S., and Fiehler, K. (2014). Gaze-dependent spatial updating of tactile targets in a localization task. Front. Psychol. 5:66. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00066
    • Pritchett, L., and Harris, L. R. (2011). Perceived touch location is affected by both eye and head position. Exp. Brain Res. 213, 229-234. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011- 2713-0
    • Pritchett, L. M., Carnevale, M., and Harris, L. R. (2012). Reference frames for coding touch location depend on the task. Exp. Brain Res. 222, 437-445. doi: 10.1007/s00221-012-3231-4
    • Röder, B., Föcker, J., Hötting, K., and Spence, C. (2008). Spatial coordinate systems for tactile spatial attention depend on developmental vision: evidence from eventrelated potentials in sighted and congenitally blind adult humans. Eur. J. Neurosci. 28, 475-481. doi: 10.1111/j.1460-9568.2008.06352.x
    • Röder, B., Rösler, F., and Spence, C. (2004). Early vision impairs tactile perception in the blind. Curr. Biol. 14, 121-124. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2003.12.054
    • Sathian, K., and Burton, H. (1991). The role of spatially selective attention in the tactile perception of texture. Percept. Psychophysiol. 50, 237-248. doi: 10.3758/BF03206747
    • Schicke, T., and Röder, B. (2006). Spatial remapping of touch: confusion of perceived stimulus order across hand and foot. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 11808- 11813. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0601486103
    • Soto-Faraco, S., Ronald, A., and Spence, C. (2004). Tactile selective attention and body posture: assessing the contribution of vision and proprioception. Percept. Psychophys. 66, 1077-1094. doi: 10.3758/BF03196837
    • Spence, C., Pavani, F., and Driver, J. (2000). Crossmodal links between vision and touch in covert endogenous spatial attention. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 26, 1298-1319. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.26.4.1298
  • Inferred research data

    The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    Title Trust
    55
    55%
  • Discovered through pilot similarity algorithms. Send us your feedback.