IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0224174.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Visual body form and orientation cues do not modulate visuo-tactile temporal integration

Author

Listed:
  • Sophie Smit
  • Anina N Rich
  • Regine Zopf

Abstract

Body ownership relies on spatiotemporal correlations between multisensory signals and visual cues specifying oneself such as body form and orientation. The mechanism for the integration of bodily signals remains unclear. One approach to model multisensory integration that has been influential in the multisensory literature is Bayesian causal inference. This specifies that the brain integrates spatial and temporal signals coming from different modalities when it infers a common cause for inputs. As an example, the rubber hand illusion shows that visual form and orientation cues can promote the inference of a common cause (one’s body) leading to spatial integration shown by a proprioceptive drift of the perceived location of the real hand towards the rubber hand. Recent studies investigating the effect of visual cues on temporal integration, however, have led to conflicting findings. These could be due to task differences, variation in ecological validity of stimuli and/or small samples. In this pre-registered study, we investigated the influence of visual information on temporal integration using a visuo-tactile temporal order judgement task with realistic stimuli and a sufficiently large sample determined by Bayesian analysis. Participants viewed videos of a touch being applied to plausible or implausible visual stimuli for one’s hand (hand oriented plausibly, hand rotated 180 degrees, or a sponge) while also being touched at varying stimulus onset asynchronies. Participants judged which stimulus came first: viewed or felt touch. Results show that visual cues do not modulate visuo-tactile temporal order judgements. This is not in line with the idea that bodily signals indicating oneself influence the integration of multisensory signals in the temporal domain. The current study emphasises the importance of rigour in our methodologies and analyses to advance the understanding of how properties of multisensory events affect the encoding of temporal information in the brain.

Suggested Citation

  • Sophie Smit & Anina N Rich & Regine Zopf, 2019. "Visual body form and orientation cues do not modulate visuo-tactile temporal integration," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-20, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224174
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0224174
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224174
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0224174&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0224174?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John P A Ioannidis, 2005. "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(8), pages 1-1, August.
    2. Scott A Love & Karin Petrini & Adam Cheng & Frank E Pollick, 2013. "A Psychophysical Investigation of Differences between Synchrony and Temporal Order Judgments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, January.
    3. David R Wozny & Ulrik R Beierholm & Ladan Shams, 2010. "Probability Matching as a Computational Strategy Used in Perception," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-7, August.
    4. Konrad P Körding & Ulrik Beierholm & Wei Ji Ma & Steven Quartz & Joshua B Tenenbaum & Ladan Shams, 2007. "Causal Inference in Multisensory Perception," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(9), pages 1-10, September.
    5. Sotaro Shimada & Kensuke Fukuda & Kazuo Hiraki, 2009. "Rubber Hand Illusion under Delayed Visual Feedback," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(7), pages 1-5, July.
    6. Marcus R. Munafò & Brian A. Nosek & Dorothy V. M. Bishop & Katherine S. Button & Christopher D. Chambers & Nathalie Percie du Sert & Uri Simonsohn & Eric-Jan Wagenmakers & Jennifer J. Ware & John P. A, 2017. "A manifesto for reproducible science," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 1(1), pages 1-9, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam N Sanborn & Ulrik R Beierholm, 2016. "Fast and Accurate Learning When Making Discrete Numerical Estimates," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-28, April.
    2. Eszter Czibor & David Jimenez‐Gomez & John A. List, 2019. "The Dozen Things Experimental Economists Should Do (More of)," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 86(2), pages 371-432, October.
    3. Wendy J Adams, 2016. "The Development of Audio-Visual Integration for Temporal Judgements," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(4), pages 1-17, April.
    4. Oliver Braganza, 2020. "A simple model suggesting economically rational sample-size choice drives irreproducibility," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(3), pages 1-19, March.
    5. Adam Altmejd & Anna Dreber & Eskil Forsell & Juergen Huber & Taisuke Imai & Magnus Johannesson & Michael Kirchler & Gideon Nave & Colin Camerer, 2019. "Predicting the replicability of social science lab experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(12), pages 1-18, December.
    6. Jannes Jegminat & Maya A Jastrzębowska & Matthew V Pachai & Michael H Herzog & Jean-Pascal Pfister, 2020. "Bayesian regression explains how human participants handle parameter uncertainty," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-23, May.
    7. Bernhard Voelkl & Lucile Vogt & Emily S Sena & Hanno Würbel, 2018. "Reproducibility of preclinical animal research improves with heterogeneity of study samples," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(2), pages 1-13, February.
    8. Jeff Miller & Rolf Ulrich, 2019. "The quest for an optimal alpha," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-13, January.
    9. Jeroen Atsma & Femke Maij & Mathieu Koppen & David E Irwin & W Pieter Medendorp, 2016. "Causal Inference for Spatial Constancy across Saccades," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-20, March.
    10. Peter W Battaglia & Daniel Kersten & Paul R Schrater, 2011. "How Haptic Size Sensations Improve Distance Perception," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-13, June.
    11. Luigi Acerbi & Kalpana Dokka & Dora E Angelaki & Wei Ji Ma, 2018. "Bayesian comparison of explicit and implicit causal inference strategies in multisensory heading perception," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(7), pages 1-38, July.
    12. Mangirdas Morkunas & Elzė Rudienė & Lukas Giriūnas & Laura Daučiūnienė, 2020. "Assessment of Factors Causing Bias in Marketing- Related Publications," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Kraft-Todd, Gordon T. & Rand, David G., 2021. "Practice what you preach: Credibility-enhancing displays and the growth of open science," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-10.
    14. Lui, P. Priscilla & Gobrial, Sarah & Pham, Savannah & Adams, Niki & Giadolor, Westley & Rollock, David, 2021. "Open Science and Multicultural Research: Some Data, Considerations, and Recommendations," OSF Preprints em9ua, Center for Open Science.
    15. Bruns, Stephan B. & Asanov, Igor & Bode, Rasmus & Dunger, Melanie & Funk, Christoph & Hassan, Sherif M. & Hauschildt, Julia & Heinisch, Dominik & Kempa, Karol & König, Johannes & Lips, Johannes & Verb, 2019. "Reporting errors and biases in published empirical findings: Evidence from innovation research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    16. Rachel Newey & Kami Koldewyn & Richard Ramsey, 2019. "The influence of prosocial priming on visual perspective taking and automatic imitation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(1), pages 1-19, January.
    17. Christoph Kayser & Ladan Shams, 2015. "Multisensory Causal Inference in the Brain," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(2), pages 1-7, February.
    18. Sharp, Gemma C. & Lawlor, Deborah A. & Richardson, Sarah S., 2018. "It's the mother!: How assumptions about the causal primacy of maternal effects influence research on the developmental origins of health and disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 20-27.
    19. Alrik Thiem & Lusine Mkrtchyan & Tim Haesebrouck & David Sanchez, 2020. "Algorithmic bias in social research: A meta-analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(6), pages 1-16, June.
    20. Aguinis, Herman & Banks, George C. & Rogelberg, Steven G. & Cascio, Wayne F., 2020. "Actionable recommendations for narrowing the science-practice gap in open science," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 27-35.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0224174. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.