Mental motor imagery and the body schema: evidence for proprioceptive dominance

Previous studies have demonstrated that both visual and proprioceptive feedback influence motor control. The relative contributions of these sensory modalities to the on-line computation of body position--that is, the body schema--remain unclear. We report a study designed to explore the roles of vision and proprioception in motor planning. The task required subjects to judge if a pictured stimulus was a right or left hand; stimuli included pictures of a right or left hand in a palm up or palm down position and in six different angular rotations (0 degrees , 60 degrees , 120 degrees , 180 degrees , 240 degrees , 300 degrees ). Each subject was tested with his/her right hand palm down and palm up. There were three conditions: a "control" condition (real hand in view), a "fake hand" condition (fake hand in view, real hand out of view), and a "proprioception" condition (no fake hand, real hand out of view). We found that proprioceptive input (that is, the subject's "felt position") had a significant influence on mental rotation whereas the visually perceived posture of the hand did not. We suggest that, at least under some circumstances, proprioceptive inflow may represent the dominant sensory input to the on-line representation of the body in space.

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

[2]  M S Graziano,et al.  Coding the location of the arm by sight. , 2000, Science.

[3]  Scott T. Grafton,et al.  Forward modeling allows feedback control for fast reaching movements , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[4]  M. Jeannerod.  Neural Simulation of Action: A Unifying Mechanism for Motor Cognition , 2001, NeuroImage.

[5]  R. J. van Beers,et al.  Integration of proprioceptive and visual position-information: An experimentally supported model. , 1999, Journal of neurophysiology.

[6]  R B Welch,et al.  An examination of the relationship between visual capture and prism adaptation , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[7]  M. Perenin,et al.  Prism adaptation to a rightward optical deviation rehabilitates left hemispatial neglect , 1998, Nature.

[8]  Alessio Toraldo,et al.  Dissociation between the mental rotation of visual images and motor images in unilateral brain-damaged patients , 2003, Brain and Cognition.

[9]  L. Parsons,et al.  Use of implicit motor imagery for visual shape discrimination as revealed by PET , 1995, Nature.

[10]  Zoubin Ghahramani,et al.  Computational principles of movement neuroscience , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[11]  M. Mon-Williams,et al.  Synaesthesia in the normal limb , 1997, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[12]  D. Wolpert,et al.  When Feeling Is More Important Than Seeing in Sensorimotor Adaptation , 2002, Current Biology.

[13]  Laurel J. Buxbaum,et al.  Specialised structural descriptions for human body parts: Evidence from autotopagnosia , 2001, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[14]  L. Parsons.  Imagined spatial transformations of one's hands and feet , 1987, Cognitive Psychology.

[15]  L. Parsons.  Temporal and kinematic properties of motor behavior reflected in mentally simulated action. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[16]  Peter T. Fox,et al.  The neural basis of implicit movements used in recognising hand shape , 1998 .

[17]  S Chieffi,et al.  Hand-centred coding of target location in visuo-spatial working memory , 1999, Neuropsychologia.

[18]  John Schwoebel,et al.  The man who executed “imagined” movements: Evidence for dissociable components of the body schema , 2002, Brain and Cognition.

[19]  Laurel J. Buxbaum,et al.  Compensatory coding of body part location in autotopagnosia: Evidence for extrinsic egocentric coding , 2001, Cognitive neuropsychology.

[20]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation of Primary Motor Cortex Affects Mental Rotation , 2022 .

[21]  Robert J. van Beers,et al.  How humans combine simultaneous proprioceptive and visual position information , 1996, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  Eleanor M. Saffran,et al.  Knowledge of the human body: A distinct semantic domain , 2002, Neurology.

[23]  H. Branch Coslett,et al.  Evidence for a Disturbance of the Body Schema in Neglect , 1998, Brain and Cognition.

[24]  S. Kosslyn,et al.  Mental rotation of objects versus hands: neural mechanisms revealed by positron emission tomography. , 1998, Psychophysiology.

[25]  Anne C. Sittig,et al.  Localization of a seen finger is based exclusively on proprioception and on vision of the finger , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[26]  C. Prablanc,et al.  Vectorial coding of movement: vision, proprioception, or both? , 1995, Journal of neurophysiology.

[27]  P. Viviani,et al.  Frames of reference and control parameters in visuomanual pointing. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[28]  C Rorden,et al.  When a rubber hand 'feels' what the real hand cannot. , 1999, Neuroreport.

[29]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see , 1998, Nature.

[30]  M. Graziano.  Where is my arm? The relative role of vision and proprioception in the neuronal representation of limb position. , 1999, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.