The moving rubber hand illusion revisited: Comparing movements and visuotactile stimulation to induce illusory ownership

Consciousness and Cognition

Volumn 26, Issue 1, 2014, Pages 117-132

  Kalckert, Andreas ^a   Ehrsson, H Henrik ^a  

^a KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Agency; Body perception; Motor control; Multisensory integration; Ownership; Rubber hand illusion; Self recognition

Indexed keywords

ACTIVE MOVEMENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; ASSOCIATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; EFFERENT NERVE; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; ILLUSION; MALE; MOVEMENT (PHYSIOLOGY); NORMAL HUMAN; PASSIVE MOVEMENT; PROPRIOCEPTION; RUBBER HAND ILLUSION; SENSORY NERVE; STIMULUS RESPONSE; TACTILE STIMULATION; VISUAL STIMULATION; VISUOTACTILE STIMULATION; ADOLESCENT; HAND; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PHYSIOLOGY; STIMULATION; TOUCH; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; FEMALE; HAND; HUMANS; ILLUSIONS; MALE; MOTOR ACTIVITY; PHYSICAL STIMULATION; PROPRIOCEPTION; TOUCH PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84897444114     PISSN: 10538100     EISSN: 10902376     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.concog.2014.02.003     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Aimola Davies A.M., White R.C., Thew G., Aimola N.M.V., Davies M. Visual capture of action, experience of ownership, and the illusion of self-touch: A new rubber hand paradigm. Perception 2010, 39(6):830-838. 10.1068/p6610.
2. Armel K.C., Ramachandran V.S. Projecting sensations to external objects: Evidence from skin conductance response. Proceedings Biological Sciences/The Royal Society 2003, 270(1523):1499-1506. 10.1098/rspb.2003.2364.
3. Bays P.M., Wolpert D.M. Computational principles of sensorimotor control that minimize uncertainty and variability. The Journal of Physiology 2006, 578(2):387-396. 10.1113/jphysiol.2006.120121.
4. Bekrater-Bodmann R., Foell J., Diers M., Flor H. The perceptual and neuronal stability of the rubber hand illusion across contexts and over time. Brain Research 2012, 1452:130-139. 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.03.001.
5. Blanke O. Multisensory brain mechanisms of bodily self-consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2012, 13(8):556-571. 10.1038/nrn3292.
6. Botvinick M., Cohen J. Rubber hands "feel" touch that eyes see. Nature 1998, 391(6669):756. 10.1038/35784.
7. Brozzoli C., Gentile G., Ehrsson H.H. That's near my hand! Parietal and premotor coding of hand-centered space contributes to localization and self-attribution of the hand. Journal of Neuroscience 2012, 32(42):14573-14582. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.2660-12.2012.
8. Crapse T.B., Sommer M.A. Corollary discharge across the animal kingdom. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2008, 9(8):587-600. 10.1038/nrn2457.
9. Daprati E., Franck N., Georgieff N., Proust J., Pacherie E., Dalery J., et al. Looking for the agent: An investigation into consciousness of action and self-consciousness in schizophrenic patients. Cognition 1997, 65(1):71-86.
10. David N., Newen A., Vogeley K. The "sense of agency" and its underlying cognitive and neural mechanisms. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17(2):523-534. 10.1016/j.concog.2008.03.004.
11. Dummer T., Picot-Annand A., Neal T., Moore C. Movement and the rubber hand illusion. Perception 2009, 38(2):271-280.
12. Edin B.B., Abbs J.H. Finger movement responses of cutaneous mechanoreceptors in the dorsal skin of the human hand. Journal of Neurophysiology 1991, 65(3):657-670.
13. Edin B.B., Johansson N. Skin strain patterns provide kinaesthetic information to the human central nervous system. The Journal of Physiology 1995, 487(Pt 1):243-251.
14. Ehrsson H.H., Holmes N.P., Passingham R.E. Touching a rubber hand: Feeling of body ownership is associated with activity in multisensory brain areas. The Journal of Neuroscience 2005, 25(45):10564-10573. 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0800-05.2005.
15. Ehrsson H.H., Spence C., Passingham R.E. That's my hand! Activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb. Science 2004, 305(5685):875-877. 10.1126/science.1097011.
16. Ehrsson H.H. The concept of body ownership and its relation to multisensory integration. The new handbook of multisensory processes 2012, 775-792. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. B.E. Stein (Ed.).
17. Farrer C., Bouchereau M., Jeannerod M., Franck N. Effect of distorted visual feedback on the sense of agency. Behavioural Neurology 2008, 19(1-2):53-57.
18. Farrer C., Franck N., Paillard J., Jeannerod M. The role of proprioception in action recognition. Consciousness and Cognition 2003, 12(4):609-619.
19. Gallagher S. Philosophical conceptions of the self: Implications for cognitive science. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000, 4(1):14-21.
20. Gandevia S.C., Smith J.L., Crawford M., Proske U., Taylor J.L. Motor commands contribute to human position sense. The Journal of Physiology 2006, 571(3):703-710. 10.1113/jphysiol.2005.103093.
21. Goodwin G.M., McCloskey D.I., Matthews P. The contribution of muscle afferents to kinaesthesia shown by vibration induced illusions of movement and by the effects of paralysing joint afferents. Brain 1972, 95(4):705-748.
22. Guterstam A., Petkova V.I., Ehrsson H.H. The illusion of owning a third arm. PLoS One 2011, 6(2):e17208. 10.1371/journal.pone.0017208.g008.
23. Haans A., Kaiser F.G., Bouwhuis D.G., IJsselsteijn W.A. Individual differences in the rubber-hand illusion: Predicting self-reports of people's personal experiences. Actpsy 2010, 141(2):169-177. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2012.07.016.
24. Hagura N., Hirose S., Matsumura M., Naito E. Am I seeing my hand? Visual appearance and knowledge of controllability both contribute to the visual capture of a person's own body. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 2012, 279(1742):3476-3481. 10.1038/415429a.
25. Heed T., Gründler M., Rinkleib J., Rudzik F.H., Collins T., Cooke E., et al. Visual information and rubber hand embodiment differentially affect reach-to-grasp actions. Actpsy 2011, 138(1):263-271. 10.1016/j.actpsy.2011.07.003.
26. Holle H., McLatchie N., Maurer S., Ward J. Proprioceptive drift without illusions of ownership for rotated hands in the "rubber hand illusion" paradigm. Cognitive Neuroscience 2011, 2(3-4):171-178. 10.1080/17588928.2011.603828.
27. Holmes N.P., Spence C. Visual bias of unseen hand position with a mirror: Spatial and temporal factors. Experimental Brain Research Experimentelle Hirnforschung Experimentation Cerebrale 2005, 166(3-4):489-497. 10.1007/s00221-005-2389-4.
28. Holst von E., Mittelstaedt H. Das Reafferenzprinzip - Wechselwirkungen zwischen Zentralnervensystem und Peripherie. Die Naturwissenschaften 1950, 20:464-476.
29. Jeannerod M. The mechanism of self-recognition in humans. Behavioural Brain Research 2003, 142(1-2):1-15.
30. Kalckert A., Ehrsson H.H. Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: A dissociation of ownership and agency. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2012, 6.
31. Kammers M.P.M., Longo M.R., Tsakiris M., Dijkerman H.C., Haggard P. Specificity and coherence of body representations. Perception 2009, 38(12):1804-1820.
32. Lloyd D.M. Spatial limits on referred touch to an alien limb may reflect boundaries of visuo-tactile peripersonal space surrounding the hand. Brain and Cognition 2007, 64(1):104-109. 10.1016/j.bandc.2006.09.013.
33. Longo M.R., Haggard P. Sense of agency primes manual motor responses. Perception 2009, 38(1):69-78.
34. Longo M.R., Schüür F., Kammers M.P.M., Tsakiris M., Haggard P. What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition 2008, 107(3):978-998. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.12.004.
35. MacDonald P.A., Paus T. The role of parietal cortex in awareness of self-generated movements: A transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Cerebral Cortex 2003, 13(9):962-967.
36. Makin T.R., Holmes N.P., Ehrsson H.H. On the other hand: Dummy hands and peripersonal space. Behavioural Brain Research 2008, 191(1):1-10. 10.1016/j.bbr.2008.02.041.
37. Matthews P.B.C. Where does Sherrington's "muscular sense" originate? Muscles, joints, corollary discharge. Annual Review of Neuroscience 1982, 5:189-218.
38. Nahab F.B., Kundu P., Gallea C., Kakareka J., Pursley R., Pohida T., et al. The neural processes underlying self-agency. Cerebral Cortex 2011, 21(1):48-55. 10.1093/cercor/bhq059.
39. Nielsen T.I. Volition: A new experimental approach. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 1963, 4:225-230.
40. Petkova V.I., Björnsdotter M., Gentile G., Jonsson T., Li T.-Q., Ehrsson H.H. From part-to whole-body ownership in the multisensory brain. Curbio 2011, 21(13):1118-1122. 10.1016/j.cub.2011.05.022.
41. Petkova V.I., Ehrsson H.H. If I were you: Perceptual illusion of body swapping. PLoS One 2008, 3(12):e3832. 10.1371/journal.pone.0003832.
42. Petkova V.I., Ehrsson H.H. When right feels left: Referral of touch and ownership between the hands. PLoS One 2009, 4(9):e6933. 10.1371/journal.pone.0006933.
43. Petkova V.I., Zetterberg H., Ehrsson H.H. Rubber hands feel touch, but not in blind individuals. PLoS One 2012, 7(4):e35912.
44. Preston C., Newport R. Self-denial and the role of intentions in the attribution of agency. Consciousness and Cognition 2010, 19(4):986-998. 10.1016/j.concog.2010.04.005.
45. Proske U., Gandevia S.C. The proprioceptive senses: Their roles in signaling body shape, body position and movement, and muscle force. Physiological Reviews 2012, 92(4):1651-1697. 10.1152/physrev.00048.2011.
46. Riemer M., Kleinböhl D., Hölzl R., Trojan J. Action and perception in the rubber hand illusion. Experimental Brain Research 2013, 1-11. 10.1007/s00221-012-3374-3.
47. Rohde M., Di Luca M., Ernst M.O. The rubber hand illusion: Feeling of ownership and proprioceptive drift do not go hand in hand. PLoS One 2011, 6(6):e21659. 10.1371/journal.pone.0021659.g004.
48. Sanchez-Vives M.V., Spanlang B., Frisoli A., Bergamasco M., Slater M. Virtual hand illusion induced by visuomotor correlations. PLoS One 2010, 5(4):e10381. 10.1371/journal.pone.0010381.
49. Sato A., Yasuda A. Illusion of sense of self-agency: Discrepancy between the predicted and actual sensory consequences of actions modulates the sense of self-agency, but not the sense of self-ownership. Cognition 2005, 94(3):241-255. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.04.003.
50. Shimada S., Qi Y., Hiraki K. Detection of visual feedback delay in active and passive self-body movements. Experimental Brain Research 2009, 201(2):359-364. 10.1007/s00221-009-2028-6.
51. Slater M., Perez-Marcos D., Ehrsson H.H., Sanchez-Vives M.V. Towards a digital body: The virtual arm illusion. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2008, 2:6. 10.3389/neuro.09.006.2008.
52. Synofzik M., Vosgerau G., Newen A. Beyond the comparator model: A multifactorial two-step account of agency. Consciousness and Cognition 2008, 17(1):219-239. 10.1016/j.concog.2007.03.010.
53. Tsakiris M. My body in the brain: A neurocognitive model of body-ownership. Neuropsychologia 2009, 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.09.034.
54. Tsakiris M., Carpenter L., James D., Fotopoulou A. Hands only illusion: Multisensory integration elicits sense of ownership for body parts but not for non-corporeal objects. Experimental Brain Research 2010, 204(3):343-352.
55. Tsakiris M., Haggard P. The rubber hand illusion revisited: Visuotactile integration and self-attribution. Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception and Performance 2005, 31(1):80-91. 10.1037/0096-1523.31.1.80.
56. Tsakiris M., Haggard P., Franck N., Mainy N., Sirigu A. A specific role for efferent information in self-recognition. Cognition 2005, 96(3):215-231. 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.08.002.
57. Tsakiris M., Prabhu G., Haggard P. Having a body versus moving your body: How agency structures body-ownership. Consciousness and Cognition 2006, 15(2):423-432. 10.1016/j.concog.2005.09.004.
58. Tsakiris M., Schütz-Bosbach S., Gallagher S. On agency and body-ownership: Phenomenological and neurocognitive reflections. Consciousness and Cognition 2007, 16(3):645-660. 10.1016/j.concog.2007.05.012.
59. van Beers R.J., Wolpert D.M., Haggard P. When feeling is more important than seeing in sensorimotor adaptation. Current Biology 2002, 12(10):834-837.
60. Walsh L.D., Moseley G.L., Taylor J.L., Gandevia S.C. Proprioceptive signals contribute to the sense of body ownership. The Journal of Physiology 2011, 589(12):3009-3021. 10.1113/jphysiol.2011.204941.
61. Wolpert D.M., Ghahramani Z. Computational principles of movement neuroscience. Nature Neuroscience 2000, 3(Suppl):1212-1217. 10.1038/81497.
62. Zopf R., Savage G., Williams M. Crossmodal congruency measures of lateral distance effects on the rubber hand illusion. Neuropsychologia 2009, 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2009.10.028.
63. Zopf R., Savage G., Williams M.A. The crossmodal congruency task as a means to obtain an objective behavioral measure in the rubber hand illusion paradigm. Journal of Visualized Experiments 2013, (77). 10.3791/50530.