↓ Skip to main content

The plausibility of visual information for hand ownership modulates multisensory synchrony perception

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, May 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
Title
The plausibility of visual information for hand ownership modulates multisensory synchrony perception
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, May 2015
DOI 10.1007/s00221-015-4300-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Regine Zopf, Jason Friedman, Mark A. Williams

Abstract

We are frequently changing the position of our bodies and body parts within complex environments. How does the brain keep track of one's own body? Current models of body ownership state that visual body ownership cues such as viewed object form and orientation are combined with multisensory information to correctly identify one's own body, estimate its current location and evoke an experience of body ownership. Within this framework, it may be possible that the brain relies on a separate perceptual analysis of body ownership cues (e.g. form, orientation, multisensory synchrony). Alternatively, these cues may interact in earlier stages of perceptual processing-visually derived body form and orientation cues may, for example, directly modulate temporal synchrony perception. The aim of the present study was to distinguish between these two alternatives. We employed a virtual hand set-up and psychophysical methods. In a two-interval force-choice task, participants were asked to detect temporal delays between executed index finger movements and observed movements. We found that body-specifying cues interact in perceptual processing. Specifically, we show that plausible visual information (both form and orientation) for one's own body led to significantly better detection performance for small multisensory asynchronies compared to implausible visual information. We suggest that this perceptual modulation when visual information plausible for one's own body is present is a consequence of body-specific sensory predictions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 2%
Spain 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Unknown 51 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 12 22%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 13%
Student > Master 6 11%
Lecturer 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 14 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 40%
Neuroscience 4 7%
Computer Science 3 5%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 18 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 21 May 2015.
All research outputs
#15,867,545
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,048
of 3,281 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#158,462
of 267,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#29
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,281 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 267,257 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.