Task demands affect spatial reference frame weighting during tactile localization in sighted and congenitally blind adults

Task demands modulate tactile localization in sighted humans, presumably through weight adjustments in the spatial integration of anatomical, skin-based, and external, posture-based information. In contrast, previous studies have suggested that congenitally blind humans, by default, refrain from automatic spatial integration and localize touch using only skin-based information. Here, sighted and congenitally blind participants localized tactile targets on the palm or back of one hand, while ignoring simultaneous tactile distractors at congruent or incongruent locations on the other hand. We probed the interplay of anatomical and external location codes for spatial congruency effects by varying hand posture: the palms either both faced down, or one faced down and one up. In the latter posture, externally congruent target and distractor locations were anatomically incongruent and vice versa. Target locations had to be reported either anatomically (“palm” or “back” of the hand), or externally (“up” or “down” in space). Under anatomical instructions, performance was more accurate for anatomically congruent than incongruent target-distractor pairs. In contrast, under external instructions, performance was more accurate for externally congruent than incongruent pairs. These modulations were evident in sighted and blind individuals. Notably, distractor effects were overall far smaller in blind than in sighted participants, despite comparable target-distractor identification performance. Thus, the absence of developmental vision seems to be associated with an increased ability to focus tactile attention towards a non-spatially defined target. Nevertheless, that blind individuals exhibited effects of hand posture and task instructions in their congruency effects suggests that, like the sighted, they automatically integrate anatomical and external information during tactile localization. Moreover, spatial integration in tactile processing is, thus, flexibly adapted by top-down information—here, task instruction—even in the absence of developmental vision.

[1]  C. Spence,et al.  Visual Capture of Touch: Out-of-the-Body Experiences With Rubber Gloves , 2000, Psychological science.

[2]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[3]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Motor coordination uses external spatial coordinates independent of developmental vision , 2014, Cognition.

[4]  Mollie E. Brooks,et al.  Generalized linear mixed models: a practical guide for ecology and evolution. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[5]  B. Röder,et al.  Integration of anatomical and external response mappings explains crossing effects in tactile localization: A probabilistic modeling approach , 2015, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[6]  B. Röder,et al.  Partial recovery of visual–spatial remapping of touch after restoring vision in a congenitally blind man , 2013, Neuropsychologia.

[7]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Bayesian integration in sensorimotor learning , 2004, Nature.

[8]  C. Spence,et al.  Tactile selective attention and body posture: Assessing the multisensory contributions of vision and proprioception , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Olivier Collignon,et al.  Improved selective and divided spatial attention in early blind subjects , 2006, Brain Research.

[10]  S. Soto-Faraco,et al.  Tactile remapping beyond space , 2010, The European journal of neuroscience.

[11]  Daniel Casasanto,et al.  Space and time in the sighted and blind , 2015, Cognition.

[12]  P. van Donkelaar,et al.  Predicting Future Sensorimotor States Influences Current Temporal Decision Making , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[13]  W Pieter Medendorp,et al.  Multisensory Processing in Spatial Orientation: An Inverse Probabilistic Approach , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[14]  Ole Jensen,et al.  Multiple Reference Frames in Cortical Oscillatory Activity during Tactile Remapping for Saccades , 2011, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  D. Bates,et al.  Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4 , 2015 .

[16]  Hadley Wickham,et al.  ggplot2 - Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis (2nd Edition) , 2017 .

[17]  M. Lassonde,et al.  Early visual deprivation alters multisensory processing in peripersonal space , 2009, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  A. Engel,et al.  Tactile remapping: from coordinate transformation to integration in sensorimotor processing , 2015, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[19]  D. Shore,et al.  Response demands and blindfolding in the crossed-hands deficit: an exploration of reference frame conflict. , 2013, Multisensory research.

[20]  Henrik Singmann,et al.  afex – Analysis of Factorial EXperiments , 2015 .

[21]  M. Landy,et al.  Measurement and modeling of depth cue combination: in defense of weak fusion , 1995, Vision Research.

[22]  S. Hillyard,et al.  Improved auditory spatial tuning in blind humans , 1999, Nature.

[23]  T. Jaeger,et al.  Categorical Data Analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. , 2008, Journal of memory and language.

[24]  B. Röder,et al.  Multiple spatial representations determine touch localization on the fingers. , 2014, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[25]  D. Cox,et al.  An Analysis of Transformations , 1964 .

[26]  Alexandre Pouget,et al.  A computational perspective on the neural basis of multisensory spatial representations , 2002, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[27]  K. Fiehler,et al.  Gaze-dependent spatial updating of tactile targets in a localization task , 2014, Front. Psychol..

[28]  Roger Newport,et al.  Noninformative Vision Improves Haptic Spatial Perception , 2002, Current Biology.

[29]  Henrik Singmann,et al.  Analysis of Factorial Experiments , 2015 .

[30]  B. Forster,et al.  Crossing the hands disrupts tactile spatial attention but not motor attention: Evidence from event-related potentials , 2012, Neuropsychologia.

[31]  Susanna Millar Self-Referent and Movement Cues in Coding Spatial Location by Blind and Sighted Children , 1981, Perception.

[32]  S. Holm A Simple Sequentially Rejective Multiple Test Procedure , 1979 .

[33]  P. Haggard,et al.  Dynamic Tuning of Tactile Localization to Body Posture , 2015, Current Biology.

[34]  F. Rösler,et al.  Altered auditory-tactile interactions in congenitally blind humans: an event-related potential study , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[35]  C. Spence,et al.  Cross-modal links in spatial attention. , 1998, Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences.

[36]  Katja Fiehler,et al.  Effector movement triggers gaze-dependent spatial coding of tactile and proprioceptive-tactile reach targets , 2014, Neuropsychologia.

[37]  T. Heed,et al.  Towards explaining spatial touch perception: Weighted integration of multiple location codes , 2016, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[38]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Processing load impairs coordinate integration for the localization of touch , 2014, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[39]  C. Spence,et al.  Confusing the mind by crossing the hands. , 2002, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[40]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Disentangling the External Reference Frames Relevant to Tactile Localization , 2016, PloS one.

[41]  C. Y. Wan,et al.  Congenital blindness leads to enhanced vibrotactile perception , 2010, Neuropsychologia.

[42]  Nicholas P. Holmes,et al.  The body schema and multisensory representation(s) of peripersonal space , 2004, Cognitive Processing.

[43]  Ole Jensen,et al.  Parietal Oscillations Code Nonvisual Reach Targets Relative to Gaze and Body , 2013, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[44]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[45]  T. Heed,et al.  Reach Trajectories Characterize Tactile Localization for Sensorimotor Decision Making , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[46]  C. Spence,et al.  Spatial coordinate systems for tactile spatial attention depend on developmental vision: evidence from event‐related potentials in sighted and congenitally blind adult humans , 2008, The European journal of neuroscience.

[47]  C. Spence,et al.  Early Vision Impairs Tactile Perception in the Blind , 2004, Current Biology.

[48]  Konrad Paul Kording,et al.  Sensory Cue Integration , 2011 .

[49]  C. Spence,et al.  Developmental vision determines the reference frame for the multisensory control of action , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[50]  M. Ernst,et al.  Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion , 2002, Nature.

[51]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Interactions of different body parts in peripersonal space: how vision of the foot influences tactile perception at the hand , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[52]  B. Röder,et al.  Movement Induces the Use of External Spatial Coordinates for Tactile Localization in Congenitally Blind Humans. , 2015, Multisensory research.

[53]  C. Spence,et al.  Multisensory integration and the body schema: close to hand and within reach , 2003, Current Biology.

[54]  Charles Spence,et al.  Response Requirements Modulate Tactile Spatial Congruency Evects for Example, given That the Body Can Adopt a Variety of Diverent Postures, a Tactile Sensation Arising , 2022 .

[55]  S. Kitazawa,et al.  Reversal of subjective temporal order due to arm crossing , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[56]  D. Burr,et al.  The Ventriloquist Effect Results from Near-Optimal Bimodal Integration , 2004, Current Biology.

[57]  A. Eardley,et al.  Event‐related potential evidence for the use of external coordinates in the preparation of tactile attention by the early blind , 2011, The European journal of neuroscience.

[58]  C. Spence,et al.  Crossmodal links between vision and touch in covert endogenous spatial attention. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[59]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Altered tactile spatial attention in the early blind , 2007, Brain Research.

[60]  D. Bates,et al.  Parsimonious Mixed Models , 2015, 1506.04967.

[61]  B. Röder,et al.  Flexibly weighted integration of tactile reference frames , 2015, Neuropsychologia.

[62]  Elena Gherri,et al.  The orienting of attention during eye and hand movements: ERP evidence for similar frame of reference but different spatially specific modulations of tactile processing , 2012, Biological Psychology.

[63]  W. Penfield,et al.  SOMATIC MOTOR AND SENSORY REPRESENTATION IN THE CEREBRAL CORTEX OF MAN AS STUDIED BY ELECTRICAL STIMULATION , 1937 .

[64]  G. DeAngelis,et al.  Multisensory integration: psychophysics, neurophysiology, and computation , 2009, Current Opinion in Neurobiology.

[65]  Franco Lepore,et al.  How visual experience impacts the internal and external spatial mapping of sensorimotor functions , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[66]  D. Bates,et al.  Mixed-Effects Models in S and S-PLUS , 2001 .

[67]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Common Anatomical and External Coding for Hands and Feet in Tactile Attention: Evidence from Event-related Potentials , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[68]  S. Soto-Faraco,et al.  Alleviating the ‘crossed-hands’ deficit by seeing uncrossed rubber hands , 2007, Experimental Brain Research.

[69]  Andreas K. Engel,et al.  Oscillatory activity reflects differential use of spatial reference frames by sighted and blind individuals in tactile attention , 2015, NeuroImage.

[70]  Laurence R. Harris,et al.  Reference frames for coding touch location depend on the task , 2012, Experimental Brain Research.

[71]  Francesco Pavani,et al.  Multisensory contributions to the 3-D representation of visuotactile peripersonal space in humans: evidence from the crossmodal congruency task , 2004, Journal of Physiology-Paris.

[72]  Philip N. Sabes,et al.  Flexible strategies for sensory integration during motor planning , 2005, Nature Neuroscience.