Skip to main content
Log in

Action and perception in the rubber hand illusion

  • Volition
  • Published:
Experimental Brain Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Voluntary motor control over artificial hands has been shown to provoke a subjective incorporation of the artificial limb into body representations. However, in most studies projected or mirrored images of own hands were presented as ‘artificial’ body parts. Using the paradigm of the rubber hand illusion (RHI), we assessed the impact of tactile sensations and voluntary movements with respect to an unambiguously body-extraneous, artificial hand. In addition to phenomenal self-reports and pointing movements towards the own hand, we introduced a new procedure for perceptual judgements enabling the assessment of proprioceptive drift and judgement reliability regarding perceived hand location. RHI effects were comparable for tactile sensations and voluntary movements, but characteristic discrepancies were found for pointing movements. They were differently affected by the induction methods, and RHI effects were uncorrelated between both methods. These observations shed new light on inconsistent results concerning RHI effects on motor responses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In another series of studies, movable artificial hands were presented within a virtual reality environment (Raz et al. 2008; Slater et al. 2009; Sanchez-Vives et al. 2010). Although this method should diminish the influence of top-down effects, the familiarity regarding computer games still raises doubts about whether a virtual hand is perceived as an external object (in the same way as a material prosthetic hand). In spite of remarkable developments in virtual reality techniques, there are great differences between the neural processing of virtual when compared to material objects (Ijsselsteijn et al. 2006).

  2. For one participant, the recording in the synchronous condition of the motor induction method failed.

  3. The results were verified at the level of single items. Entering each of the four ownership-related items separately into the linear mixed effects model revealed exactly the same significance pattern.

References

  • Aimola Davies AM, White RC, Thew G, Aimola NM, Davies M (2010) Visual capture of action, experience of ownership, and the illusion of self-touch: a new rubber hand paradigm. Perception 39:830–838

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Azañón E, Soto-Faraco S (2007) Alleviating the ‘crossed-hands’ deficit by seeing uncrossed rubber hands. Exp Brain Res 182:537–548

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Benjamini Y, Hochberg Y (1995) Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. J R Statist Soc B 57:289–300

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertamini M, Berselli N, Bode C, Lawson R, Wong LT (2011) The rubber hand illusion in a mirror. Conscious Cogn 20:1108–1119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Botvinick M, Cohen J (1998) Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 391:756

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Brass M, Haggard P (2008) The what, when, whether model of intentional action. Neuroscientist 14:319–325

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buxbaum LJ, Coslett HB (2001) Specialised structural descriptions for human body parts: evidence from autotopagnosia. Cogn Neuropsychol 18:289–306

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Cardinali L, Brozzoli C, Urquizar C, Salemme R, Roy AC, Farne A (2011) When action is not enough: tool-use reveals tactile-dependent access to body schema. Neuropsychologia 49:3750–3757

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Decety J, Sommerville JA (2003) Shared representations between self and other: a social cognitive neuroscience view. Trends Cogn Sci 7:527–533

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Deiber MP, Honda M, Ibanez V, Sadato N, Hallett M (1999) Mesial motor areas in self-initiated versus externally triggered movements examined with fMRI: effect of movement type and rate. J Neurophysiol 81:3065–3077

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkerman HC, de Haan EH (2007) Somatosensory processes subserving perception and action. Behav Brain Sci 30:189–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dummer T, Picot-Annand A, Neal T, Moore C (2009) Movement and the rubber hand illusion. Perception 38:271–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrsson HH, Spence C, Passingham RE (2004) That’s my hand! Activity in premotor cortex reflects feeling of ownership of a limb. Science 305:875–877

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Franck N, Farrer C, Georgieff N, Marie-Cardine M, Dalery J, d’Amato T, Jeannerod M (2001) Defective recognition of one’s own actions in patients with schizophrenia. Am J Psychiatry 158:454–459

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Gallagher S (2005) How the body shapes the mind. Oxford University Press Inc., New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gallese V, Sinigaglia C (2010) The bodily self as power for action. Neuropsychologia 48:746–755

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Georgieff N, Jeannerod M (1998) Beyond consciousness of external reality: a “who” system for consciousness of action and self-consciousness. Conscious Cogn 7:465–477

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Goldberg G, Bloom KK (1990) The alien hand sign. Localization, lateralization and recovery. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 69:228–238

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard P (2005) Conscious intention and motor cognition. Trends Cogn Sci 9:290–295

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard P (2008) Human volition: towards a neuroscience of will. Nat Rev Neurosci 9:934–946

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard P, Clark S, Kalogeras J (2002) Voluntary action and conscious awareness. Nat Neurosci 5:382–385

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Head H, Holmes G (1911) Sensory disturbances from cerebral lesions. Brain 34:102–254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heed T, Grundler M, Rinkleib J, Rudzik FH, Collins T, Cooke E, O’Regan JK (2011) Visual information and rubber hand embodiment differentially affect reach-to-grasp actions. Acta Psychol (Amst) 138:263–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holle H, McLatchie N, Maurer S, Ward J (2011) Proprioceptive drift without illusions of ownership for rotated hands in the “rubber hand illusion” paradigm. Cogn Neurosci 2:171–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes NP, Spence C (2005) Visual bias of unseen hand position with a mirror: spatial and temporal factors. Exp Brain Res 166:489–497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes NP, Crozier G, Spence C (2004) When mirrors lie: “Visual capture” of arm position impairs reaching performance. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci 4:193–200

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Holmes NP, Snijders HJ, Spence C (2006) Reaching with alien limbs: visual exposure to prosthetic hands in a mirror biases proprioception without accompanying illusions of ownership. Percept Psychophys 68:685–701

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ijsselsteijn WA, de Kort YAW, Haans A (2006) Is this my hand I see before me? The rubber hand illusion in reality, virtual reality, and mixed reality. Presence: Teleop Virt 15:455–464

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenkins IH, Jahanshahi M, Jueptner M, Passingham RE, Brooks DJ (2000) Self-initiated versus externally triggered movements. II. The effect of movement predictability on regional cerebral blood flow. Brain 123(6):1216–1228

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalckert A, Ehrsson HH (2012) Moving a rubber hand that feels like your own: a dissociation of ownership and agency. Front Hum Neurosci 6:40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kammers MP, van der Ham IJ, Dijkerman HC (2006) Dissociating body representations in healthy individuals: differential effects of a kinaesthetic illusion on perception and action. Neuropsychologia 44:2430–2436

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kammers MP, de Vignemont F, Verhagen L, Dijkerman HC (2009a) The rubber hand illusion in action. Neuropsychologia 47:204–211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Kammers MP, Longo MR, Tsakiris M, Dijkerman HC, Haggard P (2009b) Specificity and coherence of body representations. Perception 38:1804–1820

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kammers MP, Kootker JA, Hogendoorn H, Dijkerman HC (2010) How many motoric body representations can we grasp? Exp Brain Res 202:203–212

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Longo MR, Haggard P (2009) Sense of agency primes manual motor responses. Perception 38:69–78

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Longo MR, Schüür F, Kammers MP, Tsakiris M, Haggard P (2008) What is embodiment? A psychometric approach. Cognition 107:978–998

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Merleau-Ponty M (1962) The phenomenology of perception. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Newport R, Pearce R, Preston C (2010) Fake hands in action: embodiment and control of supernumerary limbs. Exp Brain Res 204:385–395

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Oldfield RC (1971) The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. Neuropsychologia 9:97–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Paillard J (1999) Body schema and body image: a double dissociation in deafferented patients. In: Gantchev GN, Mori S, Massion J (ed) Motor control, today and tomorrow. Sofia: Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Academic Publishing House, pp. 197–214

  • Pavani F, Spence C, Driver J (2000) Visual capture of touch: out-of-the-body experiences with rubber gloves. Psychol Sci 11:353–359

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Raz L, Weiss PL, Reiner M (2008) The virtual hand illusion and body ownership. LNCS 5024:367–372

    Google Scholar 

  • Rohde M, Di Luca M, Ernst MO (2011) The rubber hand illusion: feeling of ownership and proprioceptive drift do not go hand in hand. PLoS ONE 6:e21659

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Rossetti Y (1998) Implicit short-lived motor representations of space in brain damaged and healthy subjects. Conscious Cogn 7:520–558

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Sanchez-Vives MV, Spanlang B, Frisoli A, Bergamasco M, Slater M (2010) Virtual hand illusion induced by visuomotor correlations. PLoS ONE 5:e10381

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Slater M, Perez-Marcos D, Ehrsson HH, Sanchez-Vives MV (2009) Inducing illusory ownership of a virtual body. Front Neurosci 3:214–220

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Trojan J, Kleinböhl D, Stolle AM, Andersen OK, Hölzl R, Arendt-Nielsen L (2006) Psychophysical ‘perceptual maps’ of heat and pain sensations by direct localization of CO2 laser stimuli on the skin. Brain Res 1120:106–113

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiris M, Haggard P (2005) The rubber hand illusion revisited: visuotactile integration and self-attribution. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 31:80–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiris M, Prabhu G, Haggard P (2006) Having a body versus moving your body: how agency structures body-ownership. Conscious Cogn 15:423–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiris M, Schütz-Bosbach S, Gallagher S (2007) On agency and body-ownership: phenomenological and neurocognitive reflections. Conscious Cogn 16:645–660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Tsakiris M, Longo MR, Haggard P (2010) Having a body versus moving your body: neural signatures of agency and body-ownership. Neuropsychologia 48:2740–2749

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Walsh LD, Moseley GL, Taylor JL, Gandevia SC (2011) Proprioceptive signals contribute to the sense of body ownership. J Physiol 589:3009–3021

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wegner DM, Wheatley T (1999) Apparent mental causation: sources of the experience of will. Am Psychol 54:480–492

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Martin Riemer is indebted to the Baden-Württemberg foundation for the financial support of this research project by the Landesgraduiertenförderung of the University of Mannheim.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Martin Riemer.

Additional information

The study was approved by the local ethical committee and conducted according to the ethical standards laid down in the 6th Revision of the Declaration of Helsinki (Version Seoul 2008). The authors have no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Riemer, M., Kleinböhl, D., Hölzl, R. et al. Action and perception in the rubber hand illusion. Exp Brain Res 229, 383–393 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-012-3374-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-012-3374-3

Keywords

Navigation