Attention and suppression affect tactile perception in reach-to-grasp movements.

Reaching with the hand is characterized by a decrease in sensitivity to tactile stimuli presented to the moving hand. Here, we investigated whether tactile suppression can be canceled by attentional orienting. In a first experiment, participants performed a dual-task involving a goal-directed movement paired with the speeded detection of a tactile pulse. The pulse was either delivered to the moving or stationary hand, during movement preparation, execution, or the post-movement phase. Furthermore, stimulation was delivered with equal probability to either hand, or with a higher probability to either the moving or resting hand. The results highlighted faster RTs under conditions of higher probability of stimulation delivery to both moving and resting hands, thus indicating an attentional effect. For the motor preparation period, RTs were faster only at the resting hand under conditions where tactile stimulation was more likely to be delivered there. In a second experiment, a non-speeded perceptual task was used as a secondary task and tactile discrimination thresholds were recorded. Tactile stimulation was delivered concomitantly at both index fingers either in the movement preparation period (both before and after the selection of the movement effector had taken place), in the motor execution period, or, in a control condition, in the time-window of motor execution, but the movement of the hand was restrained. In the preparation period, tactile thresholds were comparable for the two timings of stimulation delivery; i.e., before and after the selection of the movement effector had taken place. These results therefore suggest that shortly prior to, and during, the execution of goal-directed movements, a combined facilitatory and inhibitory influence acts on tactile perception.

[1]  M. Eimer,et al.  Covert unimanual response preparation triggers attention shifts to effectors rather than goal locations , 2007, Neuroscience Letters.

[2]  Chris Rorden,et al.  Enhanced Tactile Performance at the Destination of an Upcoming Saccade , 2002, Current Biology.

[3]  H Pashler,et al.  Shifting visual attention and selecting motor responses: distinct attentional mechanisms. , 1991, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[4]  Alan C. Evans,et al.  Attention modulates somatosensory cerebral blood flow response to vibrotactile stimulation as measured by positron emission tomography , 1991, Annals of neurology.

[5]  J. Driver,et al.  Does auditory attention shift in the direction of an upcoming saccade? , 1999, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  C. Spence,et al.  Changes in tactile sensitivity over the time-course of a goal-directed movement , 2010, Behavioural Brain Research.

[7]  E. Holst,et al.  Das Reafferenzprinzip , 2004, Naturwissenschaften.

[8]  D. Burr,et al.  Changes in visual perception at the time of saccades , 2001, Trends in Neurosciences.

[9]  P. Haggard,et al.  Visual enhancement of touch and the bodily self , 2008, Consciousness and Cognition.

[10]  Roger Newport,et al.  Modulation of somatosensory perception by motor intention , 2011, Cognitive neuroscience.

[11]  D. Wolpert,et al.  Spatio-Temporal Prediction Modulates the Perception of Self-Produced Stimuli , 1999, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[12]  Brigitte Röder,et al.  Lost in the move? Secondary task performance impairs tactile change detection on the body , 2010, Consciousness and Cognition.

[13]  M. Mann,et al.  Directed Proteomic Analysis of the Human Nucleolus , 2002, Current Biology.

[14]  Daniel M Wolpert,et al.  Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability , 2007, The Journal of physiology.

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

[16]  H. Pashler Attentional Limitations in Doing Two Tasks at the Same Time , 1992 .

[17]  H. Deubel,et al.  Saccade target selection and object recognition: Evidence for a common attentional mechanism , 1996, Vision Research.

[18]  C. E. Chapman,et al.  Time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection in humans. I. Importance of stimulus location. , 1998, Journal of neurophysiology.

[19]  P. Haggard,et al.  Visual enhancement of touch in spatial body representation , 2003, Experimental Brain Research.

[20]  Jon Driver,et al.  Inhibition of return is supramodal: a demonstration between all possible pairings of vision, touch, and audition , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[21]  R. Sperry Neural basis of the spontaneous optokinetic response produced by visual inversion. , 1950, Journal of comparative and physiological psychology.

[22]  F A GELDARD,et al.  Some neglected possibilities of communication. , 1960, Science.

[23]  C. E. Chapman,et al.  Time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection in humans. III. Effect of motor tasks. , 2002, Journal of neurophysiology.

[24]  Heiner Deubel,et al.  Action preparation enhances the processing of tactile targets , 2009, Experimental Brain Research.

[25]  W. G. Koster,et al.  The psychological refractory period , 1966 .

[26]  Michael I. Jordan,et al.  An internal model for sensorimotor integration. , 1995, Science.

[27]  H. Deubel,et al.  Selective Dorsal and Ventral Processing: Evidence for a Common Attentional Mechanism in Reaching and Perception , 1998 .

[28]  M. Alexander,et al.  Principles of Neural Science , 1981 .

[29]  A. Welford THE ‘PSYCHOLOGICAL REFRACTORY PERIOD’ AND THE TIMING OF HIGH‐SPEED PERFORMANCE—A REVIEW AND A THEORY , 1952 .

[30]  Daniel M. Wolpert,et al.  Forward Models for Physiological Motor Control , 1996, Neural Networks.

[31]  Cecilia Heyes,et al.  Action Preparation Helps and Hinders Perception of Action , 2010, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[32]  C. E. Chapman,et al.  Differential controls over tactile detection in humans by motor commands and peripheral reafference. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[33]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Covert attention in touch: behavioral and ERP evidence for costs and benefits. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[34]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Covert manual response preparation triggers attentional shifts: ERP evidence for the premotor theory of attention , 2005, Neuropsychologia.

[35]  Gavin Buckingham,et al.  Gating of vibrotactile detection during visually guided bimanual reaches , 2010, Experimental Brain Research.

[36]  Francis McGlone,et al.  Reflexive spatial orienting of tactile attention , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[37]  C. Spence Cognitive Neuroscience: Searching for the Bottleneck in the Brain , 2008, Current Biology.

[38]  Rolf Verleger,et al.  Lateralized EEG components with direction information for the preparation of saccades versus finger movements , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[39]  S. Schultz Principles of Neural Science, 4th ed. , 2001 .

[40]  G. Békésy INTERACTION OF PAIRED SENSORY STIMULI AND CONDUCTION IN PERIPHERAL NERVES. , 1963 .

[41]  R. Klein,et al.  Inhibition of return , 2000, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[42]  P. Haggard,et al.  The effects of acoustic startle on sensorimotor attenuation prior to movement , 2008, Experimental Brain Research.

[43]  Martin Eimer,et al.  Dissociating effector and movement direction selection during the preparation of manual reaching movements: Evidence from lateralized ERP components , 2007, Clinical Neurophysiology.