Literature DB >> 36266418

Tactile facilitation during actual and mere expectation of object reception.

Damian M Manzone1, Luc Tremblay2, Romeo Chua3.   

Abstract

During reaching and grasping movements tactile processing is typically suppressed. However, during a reception or catching task, the object can still be acquired but without suppressive processes related to movement execution. Rather, tactile information may be facilitated as the object approaches in anticipation of object contact and the utilization of tactile feedback. Therefore, the current study investigated tactile processing during a reception task. Participants sat with their upper limb still as an object travelled to and contacted their fingers. At different points along the object's trajectory and prior to contact, participants were asked to detect tactile stimuli delivered to their index finger. To understand if the expectation of object contact contributed to any modulation in tactile processing, the object stopped prematurely on 20% of trials. Compared to a pre-object movement baseline, relative perceptual thresholds were decreased throughout the object's trajectory, and even when the object stopped prematurely. Further, there was no evidence for modulation when the stimulus was presented shortly before object contact. The former results suggest that tactile processing is facilitated as an object approaches an individual's hand. As well, we purport that the expectation of tactile feedback drives this modulation. Finally, the latter results suggest that peripheral masking may have reduced/abolished any facilitation.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 36266418      PMCID: PMC9585022          DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-22133-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Sci Rep        ISSN: 2045-2322            Impact factor:   4.996


  47 in total

1.  Time course and magnitude of movement-related gating of tactile detection in humans. II. Effects of stimulus intensity.

Authors:  S R Williams; C E Chapman
Journal:  J Neurophysiol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 2.714

2.  Effects of motor intention on the perception of somatosensory events: a behavioural and functional magnetic resonance imaging study.

Authors:  Stephen R Jackson; Amy Parkinson; Sally L Pears; Se-Ho Nam
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2011-01-06       Impact factor: 2.143

3.  The effect of target modality on visual and proprioceptive contributions to the control of movement distance.

Authors:  Fabrice R Sarlegna; Robert L Sainburg
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2007-01       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Flexible strategies for sensory integration during motor planning.

Authors:  Samuel J Sober; Philip N Sabes
Journal:  Nat Neurosci       Date:  2005-03-27       Impact factor: 24.884

5.  Continuous visual control of interception.

Authors:  Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Hum Mov Sci       Date:  2011-02-25       Impact factor: 2.161

Review 6.  Tactile suppression in goal-directed movement.

Authors:  Georgiana Juravle; Gordon Binsted; Charles Spence
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2017-08

7.  Juggling reveals a decisional component to tactile suppression.

Authors:  Georgiana Juravle; Charles Spence
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-06-30       Impact factor: 1.972

8.  Time-to-Target Simplifies Optimal Control of Visuomotor Feedback Responses.

Authors:  Justinas Česonis; David W Franklin
Journal:  eNeuro       Date:  2020-04-24

9.  World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects.

Authors: 
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Efference Copy Is Necessary for the Attenuation of Self-Generated Touch.

Authors:  Konstantina Kilteni; Patrick Engeler; H Henrik Ehrsson
Journal:  iScience       Date:  2020-01-16
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.