Different level of virtualization of sight and touch produces the uncanny valley of avatar’s hand embodiment

Humans increasingly often act through virtual and robotic avatars, which can feed back to their user only virtual sensory information. Since avatar is user’s embodiment and body image is mostly based on senses, how virtualization of sensory inputs affects avatar self-attribution is a key question for understanding nowadays human behavior. By manipulating visual and tactile inputs in a series of experiments fashioned after the rubber hand illusion, we assessed the relative weight of the virtualization of sight (Real, Robotic, Virtual) and of touch (Real, Virtual) on artificial hand embodiment. Virtualization decreased embodiment, but unexpectedly lowest embodiment was found when only one sense was virtual. Discordant levels of virtualization of sight and touch elicited revulsion, extending the concept of the uncanny valley to avatar embodiment. Besides timing, spatial constraints and realism of feedback, a matched degree of virtualization of seen and felt stimuli is a further constraint in building the representation of the body.

[1]  Alois Knoll,et al.  Biological movement increases acceptance of humanoid robots as human partners in motor interaction , 2011, AI & SOCIETY.

[2]  M. Jeannerod,et al.  Sense of body and sense of action both contribute to self-recognition , 2002, Cognition.

[3]  Heng Tao Shen,et al.  Principal Component Analysis , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[4]  B. Hommel,et al.  The virtual-hand illusion: effects of impact and threat on perceived ownership and affective resonance , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[5]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Inducing Illusory Ownership of a Virtual Body , 2009, Front. Neurosci..

[6]  Antonio Frisoli,et al.  The Modulation of Ownership and Agency in the Virtual Hand Illusion under Visuotactile and Visuomotor Sensory Feedback , 2014, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[7]  M. Slater,et al.  Measuring the Effects through Time of the Influence of Visuomotor and Visuotactile Synchronous Stimulation on a Virtual Body Ownership Illusion , 2014, Perception.

[8]  L. Zollo,et al.  Augmentation-related brain plasticity , 2014, Front. Syst. Neurosci..

[9]  M. Tsakiris,et al.  Hands only illusion: multisensory integration elicits sense of ownership for body parts but not for non-corporeal objects , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[10]  Marjolein P. M. Kammers,et al.  What is embodiment? A psychometric approach , 2008, Cognition.

[11]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  First Person Experience of Body Transfer in Virtual Reality , 2010, PloS one.

[12]  S. M. Aglioti,et al.  Mere observation of body discontinuity affects perceived ownership and vicarious agency over a virtual hand , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[13]  Christian Cipriani,et al.  Bioinspired Fingertip for Anthropomorphic Robotic Hands , 2014 .

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

[15]  Mar Gonzalez-Franco,et al.  The uncanny valley of haptics , 2018, Science Robotics.

[16]  Shuzhi Sam Ge,et al.  Prosthetic finger phalanges with lifelike skin compliance for low-force social touching interactions , 2011, Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation.

[17]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Virtual Hand Illusion Induced by Visuomotor Correlations , 2010, PloS one.

[18]  P. Rochat.  Self-perception and action in infancy , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  W Karwowski,et al.  Worker selection of safe speed and idle condition in simulated monitoring of two industrial robots. , 1991, Ergonomics.

[20]  Dana Kulic,et al.  Affective State Estimation for Human–Robot Interaction , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[21]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .

[22]  K. Hiraki,et al.  Rubber Hand Illusion under Delayed Visual Feedback , 2009, PloS one.

[23]  Holger Regenbrecht,et al.  The Experience of Presence: Factor Analytic Insights , 2001, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[24]  Domenico Formica,et al.  Intermittent Theta Burst Stimulation Over Ventral Premotor Cortex or Inferior Parietal Lobule Does Not Enhance the Rubber Hand Illusion , 2018, Front. Neurosci..

[25]  Christian Cipriani,et al.  Vibrotactile Sensory Substitution Elicits Feeling of Ownership of an Alien Hand , 2012, PloS one.

[26]  Maria V. Sanchez-Vives,et al.  Towards a Digital Body: The Virtual Arm Illusion , 2008, Frontiers in human neuroscience.

[27]  Yvonne de Kort,et al.  Is This My Hand I See Before Me? The Rubber Hand Illusion in Reality, Virtual Reality, and Mixed Reality , 2006, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[28]  M. Slater,et al.  The building blocks of the full body ownership illusion , 2013, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[29]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  Revisiting the uncanny valley theory: Developing and validating an alternative to the Godspeed indices , 2010, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[30]  Karl F. MacDorman,et al.  The Uncanny Valley [From the Field] , 2012, IEEE Robotics Autom. Mag..

[31]  Heloir,et al.  The Uncanny Valley , 2019, The Animation Studies Reader.

[32]  P. Haggard,et al.  The rubber hand illusion revisited: visuotactile integration and self-attribution. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[33]  V. Ramachandran,et al.  Projecting sensations to external objects: evidence from skin conductance response , 2003, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences.

[34]  H. Henrik Ehrsson,et al.  No causal link between changes in hand position sense and feeling of limb ownership in the rubber hand illusion , 2015, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.