Abstract
Can viewing our own body modified in size reshape the bodily representation employed for interacting with the environment? This question was addressed here by exposing participants to either an enlarged, a shrunken, or an unmodified view of their own hand in a reach-to-grasp task toward a target of fixed dimensions. When presented with a visually larger hand, participants modified the kinematics of their grasping movement by reducing maximum grip aperture. This adjustment was carried over even when the hand was rendered invisible in subsequent trials, suggesting a stable modification of the bodily representation employed for the action. The effect was specific for the size of the grip aperture, leaving the other features of the reach-to-grasp movement unaffected. Reducing the visual size of the hand did not induce the opposite effect, although individual differences were found, which possibly depended on the degree of subject’s reliance on visual input. A control experiment suggested that the effect exerted by the vision of the enlarged hand could not be merely explained by simple global visual rescaling. Overall, our results suggest that visual information pertaining to the size of the body is accessed by the body schema and is prioritized over the proprioceptive input for motor control.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berlucchi G, Aglioti SM (2010) The body in the brain revisited. Exp Brain Res 200:25–35
Botvinick M, Cohen J (1998) Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391:756
Bruno N, Bertamini M (2010) Haptic perception after a change in hand size. Neuropsychologia 48:1853–1856
Buccino G, Solodkin A, Small SL (2006) Functions of the mirror neuron system: implications for neurorehabilitation. Cogn Behav Neurol 19:55–63
Burge J, Girshick AR, Banks MS (2010) Visual-haptic adaptation is determined by relative reliability. J Neurosci 30:7714–7721
De Vignemont F (2010) Body schema and body image-Pros and cons. Neuropsychologia 48:669–680
de Vignemont F, Ehrsson HH, Haggard P (2005) Bodily illusions modulate tactile perception. Curr Biol 15:1286–1290
Ehrsson HH, Kito T, Sadato N, Passingham RE, Naito E (2005) Neural substrate of body size: illusory feeling of shrinking of the waist. PLoS Biol 3:2200–2207
Ernst MO, Banks MS (2002) Humans integrate visual and haptic information in a statistically optimal fashion. Nature 415:429–433
Fitts PM (1954) The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J Exp Psychol 47:381–391
Gallagher S (2005) How the body shapes the mind. Oxford University Press, New York
Harris CS (1965) Perceptual adaptation to inverted, reversed and displaced vision. Psychol Rev 72:419–444
Head H, Holmes G (1911–1912) Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain 34:102–254
Jacobson LS, Goodale MA (1991) Factors affecting higher-order movement planning: a kinematic analysis of human prehension. Exp Brain Res 86:199–208
Kammers MP, van der Ham IJ, Dijkerman HC (2006) Dissociating body representations in healthy individuals: differential effects of a kinaesthetic illusion on perception and action. Neuropsychologia 44:2430–2436
Kammers MP, Longo MR, Tsakiris M, Dijkerman HC, Haggard P (2009) Specificity and coherence of body representations. Perception 38:1804–1820
Kammers MP, Kootker JA, Hogendoorn H, Dijkerman HC (2010) How many motoric body representations can we grasp? Exp Brain Res 202:203–212
Karok S, Newport R (2010) The continuous updating of grasp in response to dynamic changes in object size, hand size and distractor proximity. Neuropsychologia 48:3891–3900
Keetels M, Vroomen J (2012) Exposure to delayed visual feedback of the hand changes motor-sensory synchrony perception. Exp Brain Res 219:431–440
Linkenauger SA, Ramenzoni V, Proffitt DR (2010) Illusory shrinkage and growth: body-based rescaling affects the perception of size. Psychol Sci 21:1318–1325
Longo MR, Haggard P (2010) An implicit body representation underlying human position sense. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 107:11727–11732
Mancini F, Longo MR, Kammers MP, Haggard P (2011) Visual distortion of body size modulates pain perception. Psychol Sci 22:325–330
Marino BF, Stucchi N, Nava E, Haggard P, Maravita A (2010) Distorting the visual size of the hand affects hand pre-shaping during grasping. Exp Brain Res 202:499–505
Marteniuk RG, MacKenzie CL, Jeannerod M, Athenes S, Dugas C (1987) Constraints on human arm movement trajectories. Can J Psychol 41:365–378
Mon-Williams M, Wann JP, Jenkinson M, Rushton K (1997) Synaesthesia in the normal limb. Proc Biol Sci 264:1007–1010
Moseley GL, Parsons TJ, Spence C (2008) Visual distortion of a limb modulates the pain and swelling evoked by movement. Curr Biol 18:1047–1048
Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113
Paillard J (1999) Body schema and body image a double dissociation in deafferented patients. In: Gantchev GN, Mori S, Massion J (eds) Motor control, today and tomorrow. Academic Publishing House, Sophia
Paulignan Y, Frak VG, Toni I, Jeannerod M (1997) Influence of object position and size on human prehension movements. Exp Brain Res 114:226–234
Pavani F, Zampini M (2007) The role of hand size in the fake-hand illusion paradigm. Perception 36:1547–1554
Rand MK, Squire LM, Stelmach GE (2006) Effect of speed manipulation on the control of aperture closure during reach-to-grasp movements. Exp Brain Res 174:74–85
Rock I, Harris CS (1967) Vision and touch. Sci Am 216:96–104
Rock I, Victor J (1964) Vision and touch: an experimentally created conflict between the two senses. Science 143:594–596
Schlicht EJ, Schrater PR (2007) Impact of coordinate transformation uncertainty on human sensorimotor control. J Neurophysiol 97:4203–4214
Schwoebel J, Coslett HB (2005) Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. J Cogn Neurosci 17:543–553
Sober SJ, Sabes PN (2005) Flexible strategies for sensory integration during motor planning. Nat Neurosci 8:490–497
van Beers RJ, Wolpert DM, Haggard P (2002) When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Curr Biol 12:834–837
van der Hoort B, Guterstam A, Ehrsson HH (2011) Being Barbie: the size of one’s own body determines the perceived size of the world. PLoS ONE 6:e20195
Welch RB, Warren DH (1986) Intersensory interactions. In: Boff KR, Kaufman L, Thomas JP (eds) Handbook of perception and human performance, vol 1. Wiley, New York, pp 251–2536
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bernardi, N.F., Marino, B.F., Maravita, A. et al. Grasping in wonderland: altering the visual size of the body recalibrates the body schema. Exp Brain Res 226, 585–594 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3467-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-013-3467-7