Literature DB >> 25080130

Vibrotactile discriminative capacity is impacted in a digit-specific manner with concurrent unattended hand stimulation.

Richard H Nguyen1, Theresa M Forshey, Jameson K Holden, Eric M Francisco, Bryan Kirsch, Oleg Favorov, Mark Tommerdahl.   

Abstract

A number of perceptual and neurophysiological studies have investigated the effects of delivering unilateral versus bilateral tactile sensory stimulation. While a number of studies indicate that perceptual discrimination degrades with opposite-hand stimulation, there have been no reports that examined the digit specificity of cross-hemispheric interactions to discriminative capabilities. The purpose of this study was to determine whether unattended hand (UH) stimulation significantly degraded or improved amplitude discriminative capacity on the attended hand (AH) in a digit-specific manner. The methods are based on a sensory perceptual task (vibrotactile amplitude discriminative capacity on the tips of the fingers D2 and D3 of the left hand) in the absence and presence of conditioning stimuli delivered to D2 and D3 of the right hand. Non-specific equal-amplitude stimulation to D2 and D3 of the UH significantly worsened amplitude discrimination (AD) performance, while delivering unequal-amplitude stimuli to D2 and D3 of the UH worsened task performance only under the condition in which the unattended stimuli failed to appropriately match the stimulus parameters on the AH. Additionally, delivering single-site stimuli to D2 or D3 of the UH resulted in degraded performance on the AD task when the stimulus amplitude did not match the amplitude of the stimulus applied to homologous digits of the AH. The findings demonstrate that there is a reduction in performance under conditions where UH stimulation least matched stimulation applied to the AH, while there was little or no change in performance when stimulus conditions on the homologous digit(s) of the contralateral sites were similar. Results suggest that bilateral interactions influence perception in a context-dependent manner that is digit specific.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25080130     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-014-4045-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  66 in total

1.  Contralateral and ipsilateral responses in primary somatosensory cortex following electrical median nerve stimulation--an fMRI study.

Authors:  Takashi Nihashi; Shinji Naganawa; Chiho Sato; Hisashi Kawai; Tatsuya Nakamura; Hiroshi Fukatsu; Takeo Ishigaki; Ikuo Aoki
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2004-12-25       Impact factor: 3.708

2.  Ipsilateral input modifies the primary somatosensory cortex response to contralateral skin flutter.

Authors:  Mark Tommerdahl; Stephen B Simons; Joannellyn S Chiu; Oleg Favorov; Barry L Whitsel
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-05-31       Impact factor: 6.167

3.  Transient suppression of ipsilateral primary somatosensory cortex during tactile finger stimulation.

Authors:  Yevhen Hlushchuk; Riitta Hari
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2006-05-24       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Vibrotactile amplitude discrimination capacity parallels magnitude changes in somatosensory cortex and follows Weber's Law.

Authors:  E Francisco; V Tannan; Z Zhang; J Holden; M Tommerdahl
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2008-07-24       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 5.  The balance between excitation and inhibition and functional sensory processing in the somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  Zhi Zhang; Qian-Quan Sun
Journal:  Int Rev Neurobiol       Date:  2011       Impact factor: 3.230

6.  Rate dependency of vibrotactile stimulus modulation.

Authors:  E Francisco; J Holden; Z Zhang; O Favorov; M Tommerdahl
Journal:  Brain Res       Date:  2011-07-27       Impact factor: 3.252

7.  Effects of age on negative BOLD signal changes in the primary somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  Sonja Gröschel; Jan Martin Sohns; Carsten Schmidt-Samoa; Jürgen Baudewig; Lars Becker; Peter Dechent; Andreas Kastrup
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2013-01-04       Impact factor: 6.556

8.  Effects of parietal TMS on somatosensory judgments challenge interhemispheric rivalry accounts.

Authors:  Neir Eshel; Christian C Ruff; Bernhard Spitzer; Felix Blankenburg; Jon Driver
Journal:  Neuropsychologia       Date:  2010-08-01       Impact factor: 3.139

9.  Spatiotemporal integration of tactile information in human somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  Zhao Zhu; Elizabeth A Disbrow; Johanna M Zumer; David J McGonigle; Srikantan S Nagarajan
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2007-03-14       Impact factor: 3.288

10.  A vibrotactile behavioral battery for investigating somatosensory processing in children and adults.

Authors:  Nicolaas A J Puts; Richard A E Edden; Ericka L Wodka; Stewart H Mostofsky; Mark Tommerdahl
Journal:  J Neurosci Methods       Date:  2013-05-06       Impact factor: 2.390

View more
  4 in total

1.  Early integration of bilateral touch in the primary somatosensory cortex.

Authors:  Luigi Tamè; Francesco Pavani; Christos Papadelis; Alessandro Farnè; Christoph Braun
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2014-12-16       Impact factor: 5.038

2.  Neural Dedifferentiation across the Lifespan in the Motor and Somatosensory Systems.

Authors:  Kaitlin Cassady; Marit F L Ruitenberg; Patricia A Reuter-Lorenz; Mark Tommerdahl; Rachael D Seidler
Journal:  Cereb Cortex       Date:  2020-05-18       Impact factor: 5.357

3.  Age-Related Reductions in Tactile and Motor Inhibitory Function Start Early but Are Independent.

Authors:  Marit F L Ruitenberg; Kaitlin E Cassady; Patricia A Reuter-Lorenz; Mark Tommerdahl; Rachael D Seidler
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2019-07-30       Impact factor: 5.750

4.  Multidigit tactile perception I: motion integration benefits for tactile trajectories presented bimanually.

Authors:  Irena Arslanova; Shinya Takamuku; Hiroaki Gomi; Patrick Haggard
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2022-07-13       Impact factor: 2.974

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.