↓ Skip to main content

Auditory-Somatosensory Temporal Sensitivity Improves When the Somatosensory Event Is Caused by Voluntary Body Movement

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, December 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (71st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Auditory-Somatosensory Temporal Sensitivity Improves When the Somatosensory Event Is Caused by Voluntary Body Movement
Published in
Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, December 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnint.2016.00042
Pubmed ID
Authors

Norimichi Kitagawa, Masaharu Kato, Makio Kashino

Abstract

When we actively interact with the environment, it is crucial that we perceive a precise temporal relationship between our own actions and sensory effects to guide our body movements. Thus, we hypothesized that voluntary movements improve perceptual sensitivity to the temporal disparity between auditory and movement-related somatosensory events compared to when they are delivered passively to sensory receptors. In the voluntary condition, participants voluntarily tapped a button, and a noise burst was presented at various onset asynchronies relative to the button press. The participants made either "sound-first" or "touch-first" responses. We found that the performance of temporal order judgment (TOJ) in the voluntary condition (as indexed by the just noticeable difference (JND)) was significantly better (M = 42.5 ms ± 3.8 SEM) than that when their finger was passively stimulated (passive condition: M = 66.8 ms ± 6.3 SEM). We further examined whether the performance improvement with voluntary action can be attributed to the prediction of the timing of the stimulation from sensory cues (sensory-based prediction), kinesthetic cues contained in voluntary action, and/or to the prediction of stimulation timing from the efference copy of the motor command (motor-based prediction). When three noise bursts were presented before the target burst with regular intervals (predictable condition) and when the participant's finger was moved passively to press the button (involuntary condition), the TOJ performance was not improved from that in the passive condition. These results suggest that the improvement in sensitivity to temporal disparity between somatosensory and auditory events caused by the voluntary action cannot be attributed to sensory-based prediction and kinesthetic cues. Rather, the prediction from the efference copy of the motor command would be crucial for improving the temporal sensitivity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Germany 1 3%
Unknown 34 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 27%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 5%
Other 5 14%
Unknown 6 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 35%
Neuroscience 8 22%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 7 19%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 April 2017.
All research outputs
#6,317,557
of 22,919,505 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#278
of 856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#117,193
of 420,986 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience
#5
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,919,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its peers.
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 420,986 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.