Action‐oriented representation of peripersonal and extrapersonal space: Insights from manual and locomotor actions1

:  This paper reviews behavioral evidence demonstrating that space is accurately represented in the brain in relation to action capabilities. We initially review intriguing neuropsychological findings that show that space is differentially represented depending on whether the area is in reach of the hand (peripersonal space) or out of reach of the hand (extrapersonal space). We then review the literature on the characteristics of locomotor actions for avoiding obstacles to show that the relative dimensions of obstacles to relevant body parts are accurately represented at least one step before the obstacles are reached, i.e., while the obstacles are present in the extrapersonal space. The findings obtained from a number of studies on manual and locomotor actions will yield tentative conclusions: (a) the representation of one's body (body schema) is deeply involved in one's representation of space; (b) the representation of space is modified in response to alteration of action capabilities, although this is likely to occur only for well-learned actions, irrespective of the type; and (c) representation of space centered on the hand somewhat differs from that centered on the whole body.

[1]  G. Holmes,et al.  Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions , 1911 .

[2]  J. Ogden Autotopagnosia. Occurrence in a patient without nominal aphasia and with an intact ability to point to parts of animals and objects. , 1985, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[3]  W. Warren,et al.  Visual guidance of walking through apertures: body-scaled information for affordances. , 1987, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  A. Sirigu,et al.  Multiple representations contribute to body knowledge processing. Evidence from a case of autotopagnosia. , 1991, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[5]  J. Marshall,et al.  Left neglect for near but not far space in man , 1991, Nature.

[6]  M. Jeannerod The representing brain: Neural correlates of motor intention and imagery , 1994, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[7]  M. Farah,et al.  The psychological reality of the body schema: a test with normal participants. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[8]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  Touching the phantom limb , 1995, Nature.

[9]  M. Tanaka,et al.  Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones. , 1996, Neuroreport.

[10]  S. Aglioti,et al.  Disownership of left hand and objects related to it in a patient with right brain damage , 1996, Neuroreport.

[11]  A. Patla,et al.  Locomotor Patterns of the Leading and the Trailing Limbs as Solid and Fragile Obstacles Are Stepped Over: Some Insights Into the Role of Vision During Locomotion. , 1996, Journal of motor behavior.

[12]  S. Aglioti,et al.  The body in the brain: neural bases of corporeal awareness , 1997, Trends in Neurosciences.

[13]  A E Patla,et al.  Where and when do we look as we approach and step over an obstacle in the travel path? , 1997, Neuroreport.

[14]  Elisabetta Làdavas,et al.  Seeing where your hands are , 1997, Nature.

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

[16]  A. Cowey,et al.  No abrupt change in visual hemineglect from near to far space , 1998, Neuropsychologia.

[17]  A. Patla How Is Human Gait Controlled by Vision , 1998 .

[18]  Giuseppe di Pellegrino,et al.  Neuropsychological Evidence of an Integrated Visuotactile Representation of Peripersonal Space in Humans , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[19]  William H. Warren,et al.  Visually Controlled Locomotion: 40 years Later , 1998 .

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

[21]  S. D. Prentice,et al.  What guides the selection of alternate foot placement during locomotion in humans , 1999, Experimental Brain Research.

[22]  J R Tresilian,et al.  Analysis of recent empirical challenges to an account of interceptive timing , 1999, Perception & psychophysics.

[23]  A. Berti,et al.  When Far Becomes Near: Remapping of Space by Tool Use , 2000, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[24]  A Farnè,et al.  Dynamic size‐change of hand peripersonal space following tool use , 2000, Neuroreport.

[25]  R Sekuler,et al.  Optic Flow Helps Humans Learn to Navigate through Synthetic Environments , 2000, Perception.

[26]  U. Proske,et al.  Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1007/s002210000380 RESEARCH ARTICLE , 2022 .

[27]  F. Lacquaniti,et al.  Interactions between posture and locomotion: motor patterns in humans walking with bent posture versus erect posture. , 2000, Journal of neurophysiology.

[28]  A Maravita,et al.  Vision and touch through the looking glass in a case of crossmodal extinction , 2000, Neuroreport.

[29]  F. Pavani,et al.  Left tactile extinction following visual stimulation of a rubber hand. , 2000, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[30]  Endre E. Kadar,et al.  Toward an Ecological Field Theory of Perceptual Control of Locomotion , 2000 .

[31]  L. Buxbaum,et al.  The Role of the Dynamic Body Schema in Praxis: Evidence from Primary Progressive Apraxia , 2000, Brain and Cognition.

[32]  A. Patla,et al.  “Look where you’re going!”: gaze behaviour associated with maintaining and changing the direction of locomotion , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[33]  Atsushi Iriki,et al.  Self-images in the video monitor coded by monkey intraparietal neurons , 2001, Neuroscience Research.

[34]  Jon Driver,et al.  Reaching with a tool extends visual–tactile interactions into far space: evidence from cross-modal extinction , 2001, Neuropsychologia.

[35]  V. Dietz,et al.  Reflex adaptations during treadmill walking with increased body load , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[36]  William H. Warren,et al.  Optic flow is used to control human walking , 2001, Nature Neuroscience.

[37]  Glyn W Humphreys,et al.  Widening the Sphere of Influence: Using a Tool to Extend Extrapersonal Visual Space in a Patient with Severe Neglect , 2002, Neurocase.

[38]  C. Spence,et al.  Tool-use changes multimodal spatial interactions between vision and touch in normal humans , 2002, Cognition.

[39]  Brian E. Maki,et al.  Can stabilizing features of rapid triggered stepping reactions be modulated to meet environmental constraints? , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[40]  Nicola Smania,et al.  Coding of far and near space during walking in neglect patients. , 2002, Neuropsychology.

[41]  Takahiro Higuchi,et al.  Freezing degrees of freedom under stress: kinematic evidence of constrained movement strategies. , 2002, Human movement science.

[42]  C. Spence,et al.  Seeing Your Own Touched Hands in a Mirror Modulates Cross-Modal Interactions , 2002, Psychological science.

[43]  J. Norman Two visual systems and two theories of perception: An attempt to reconcile the constructivist and ecological approaches. , 2001, The Behavioral and brain sciences.

[44]  Aftab E Patla,et al.  The influence of multiple obstacles in the travel path on avoidance strategy. , 2002, Gait & posture.

[45]  Joan N. Vickers,et al.  How far ahead do we look when required to step on specific locations in the travel path during locomotion? , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[46]  J. Duysens,et al.  Adaptations in arm movements for added mass to wrist or ankle during walking , 2002, Experimental Brain Research.

[47]  Renato Moraes,et al.  The effects of distant and on-line visual information on the control of approach phase and step over an obstacle during locomotion , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[48]  A.E. Patla,et al.  Strategies for dynamic stability during adaptive human locomotion , 2003, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine.

[49]  G. Fink,et al.  Neural correlates of the first-person-perspective , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[50]  Karen D Davis,et al.  The effect of tactile and visual sensory inputs on phantom limb awareness. , 2003, Brain : a journal of neurology.

[51]  J. Duysens,et al.  Older women strongly prefer stride lengthening to shortening in avoiding obstacles , 2005, Experimental Brain Research.

[52]  Angela Sirigu,et al.  Spatial Coding of the Predicted Impact Location of a Looming Object , 2004, Current Biology.

[53]  V Weerdesteyn,et al.  Gait adjustments in response to an obstacle are faster than voluntary reactions. , 2004, Human movement science.

[54]  G. Humphreys,et al.  Visuomotor cuing through tool use in unilateral visual neglect. , 2004, The Journal of general psychology.

[55]  S. M. Morton,et al.  Prism adaptation during walking generalizes to reaching and requires the cerebellum. , 2004, Journal of neurophysiology.

[56]  M. Anthony Lewis,et al.  Strategies and determinants for selection of alternate foot placement during human locomotion: influence of spatial and temporal constraints , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[57]  Volker Dietz,et al.  Obstacle avoidance during human walking: effects of biomechanical constraints on performance. , 2004, Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation.

[58]  Takahiro Higuchi,et al.  Visual estimation of spatial requirements for locomotion in novice wheelchair users. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[59]  C. Spence,et al.  Extending or projecting peripersonal space with tools? Multisensory interactions highlight only the distal and proximal ends of tools , 2004, Neuroscience Letters.

[60]  Claude Prablanc,et al.  Is there an optimal arm posture? Deterioration of finger localization precision and comfort sensation in extreme arm-joint postures , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[61]  Kathleen A. Turano,et al.  Optic-flow and egocentric-direction strategies in walking: Central vs peripheral visual field , 2005, Vision Research.

[62]  Markus Lappe,et al.  Absolute travel distance from optic flow , 2005, Vision Research.

[63]  Robert D McIntosh,et al.  The neurological basis of visual neglect , 2005, Current opinion in neurology.

[64]  Michael E. Cinelli,et al.  Locomotion through apertures when wider space for locomotion is necessary: adaptation to artificially altered bodily states , 2006, Experimental Brain Research.