Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Full Access Greater sensitivity in detecting cross-modal asynchrony for body parts that are seen most often

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Greater sensitivity in detecting cross-modal asynchrony for body parts that are seen most often

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

For more content, see Multisensory Research and Spatial Vision.

We have previously shown that people are more sensitive at detecting asynchrony between a self-generated movement and delayed visual feedback when the perspective of the movement matches the ‘natural view’ suggesting an internal, visual, canonical body representation (Hoover and Harris, 2011). Is there a similar variation in sensitivity for parts of the body that cannot be seen in a first-person perspective? To test this, participants made movements with their hands and head (viewing their face or the back of their head) under four viewing conditions: (1) the natural (or direct) view, (2) mirror-reversed, (3) inverted, and (4) inverted and mirror-reversed. Participants indicated which of two periods (one with a minimum delay, the other with an added delay of 33–264 ms) was delayed and their sensitivity to delay was calculated. A significant linear trend was found when comparing sensitivity to detect cross-modal asynchrony in the ‘natural’ or ‘direct’ view condition across body parts; where sensitivity was greatest when viewing body parts seen most often (hands), intermediary for viewing body parts that are seen only indirectly (moving head while viewing face), and least for viewing body parts that are never seen at all (moving head while viewing back of the head). Further, dependency on viewpoint was most evident for body parts that are seen most often or indirectly, but not for body parts that are never seen. Results are discussed in terms of a visual representation of the body.

Affiliations: 1: Centre for Vision Research, Department of Psychology, York University, CA

We have previously shown that people are more sensitive at detecting asynchrony between a self-generated movement and delayed visual feedback when the perspective of the movement matches the ‘natural view’ suggesting an internal, visual, canonical body representation (Hoover and Harris, 2011). Is there a similar variation in sensitivity for parts of the body that cannot be seen in a first-person perspective? To test this, participants made movements with their hands and head (viewing their face or the back of their head) under four viewing conditions: (1) the natural (or direct) view, (2) mirror-reversed, (3) inverted, and (4) inverted and mirror-reversed. Participants indicated which of two periods (one with a minimum delay, the other with an added delay of 33–264 ms) was delayed and their sensitivity to delay was calculated. A significant linear trend was found when comparing sensitivity to detect cross-modal asynchrony in the ‘natural’ or ‘direct’ view condition across body parts; where sensitivity was greatest when viewing body parts seen most often (hands), intermediary for viewing body parts that are seen only indirectly (moving head while viewing face), and least for viewing body parts that are never seen at all (moving head while viewing back of the head). Further, dependency on viewpoint was most evident for body parts that are seen most often or indirectly, but not for body parts that are never seen. Results are discussed in terms of a visual representation of the body.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/18784763/25/0/18784763_025_00_S184_text.html;jsessionid=_Y5e9y9cqVGwoAfWbl6hm2t0.x-brill-live-03?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x648260&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x648260
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Hoover A. E. N., Harris L. R. (2011). "Perspective modulates temporal synchrony discrimination of visual and proprioceptive information in self-generated movements", i-Perception Vol 2( 8), 926.
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x648260
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187847612x648260
2012-01-01
2016-12-03

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation