Multisensory Integration Flashcards
(41 cards)
Perception to action
Psychophysics- present sensory stimuli and report if they felt anything
Lighting a match- seemingly easy, reaching, grasping, manipulating objects
Seemingly hard logic puzzles
Computers are good at hard tasks
Reach/grasps- robots are bad at seemingly easy tasks
Moravec’s paradox
1998
High level cognitive reasoning tasks- easy for robots
Low level cognitive tasks, perception- hard
Computers show adult level performance on intelligence test/ playing checkers
To give them skills of 1yrs old concerning perception and mobility
Bias- we assumed if these tasks were easy to us they would be simple for robot
Lighting match
Anaesthetise finger- loss of touch sensation from fingers - sight still there
Does not affect motor control
When sensation is blocked, much harder to light the match
25s- block sensation
5s- normal
Shows vision and sensation very important for simple task
Multi sensory integration
Touch and vision integrate
Challenges in multi sensory integration
Transforming representation from different senses to common representational space
Integrating info from different senses into coherent percept -> mismatch
Reference frame
Representation schemas of information from different schemas
Snake game:
Player perspective: coordinates of snake in the game-top-down view
Snake perspective: see the world through its eyes- turn left/ right
Problem: sensory input in player, control in snake-> need to know info about body layout of snake
Reference frames for different senses
Vision = eye centred/ retinal- location of visual stimulus on retina
Audition= head centred- location of sound source in respect to ears
Touch= body centred- location of tactile stimulus on skin
Need to convert between the reference frames and to external space
Coordinate transformation
Dog barking and seeing dog= separate reference frames
How to convert between two and to know the difference between the two you have to know
Angle between two
Converting between frames- have to know position and orientation of body parts
The body schema
Spatial coded: position of each body part in external space
Modular: different body parts processed in different brain regions
Updated with movement: automated and continuous tracking of body posture
Adaptable: changes when body changes
Supramodel: combines input from proprioception, touch and vision
Coherent: resolves perceptual conflicts
Interpersonal: observed actions are represented within the same body schema
Types of body representation
Body schema: sensorimotor representation that guides action
Body image: body percept, body concept, body affect -> how we think/ feel about our current body
Doe Body posture affect perception
Temporal judgement task
Stimulate both hands in random order, pots have to stretch fingers of hand stimulated
Arms crossed / arms uncrossed
When arms crossed- ppts mix up which hand was stimulated
Solving task- do not need input from body schema when arms uncrossed
Body schema interferes with basic perception
How does a body schema develop
6mnth old
Schema starts to interfere with tactile orienting
Shown when crossing/uncrossing feet and buzzing one
4mnths- no difference I’d crossed, reach for right foot
6mnth- baby reaches for correct foot, more correct when feet uncrossed
No arm crossing
Tactile discrimination task- determine which finger was vibrated
Visual distract either on same hand or other hand
Distractors led to response delays
Congruent distracts lead to longer delays than incongruent
62ms vs 20ms
Arm crossing
Tactile tumulus in same side of body, visual stimulus on different side
Effect of visual distractor moves with the hand during arm crossing
Cross modal interactions mediated by body schema
Opposite response
67ms vs 3ms
Peri personal space (PPS)
Space immediately surrounding our bodies
Objects in PPS can be grasped and manipulated immediately
Tool use
Extending the body
Tools are incorporated into the body schema
Cross modal congruency effects apply during tool use
No crossing of body parts only tools= same delay effects
Tools become part of the body schema, represented same in brain
Alice in wonderland syndrome
Distortion in perception of size
Body parts might appear smaller (micromatognosia) or bigger than they are (macrosomatognosia)
Affects whole body
Associated with childhood and migraines
Autotopagnosia
Unable to locate body parts
Loss of spatial unity of body
Patients can name body parts but order is lost
Can’t point out where body part is, unaware of how it looks
Finger agnosia- fused percept of finger, can not indicate what finger was stimulated
Phantom limb
Still feel presence of limb even after loss of limb
May include agency/ movement
Associated with pain
Can change size over time- shrink / telescoping
Double dissociation
Causes decomposition or concept of body representation
Cross modal neurons
Neuron fires when you put an object within range/ touches of the hand- respond when seen is touched / object moves near hand
Neuron responds to visual and tactile stimuli
Visual receptive friend moves with the position of the hand
Modified by body schema
Neurons incorporating tools
When monkey holding tool response space expands
Expansion of Peripersonal space during tool use reflected in neural response
As response field expands, body schema encompasses the tool
Integration problem
To see something- represented in external space
To hear- auditory input- represented in a different reference frame
Have to view according to both these inputs -> sensory conflict
Sensory conflict
Different senses might provide conflicting information about a sensory stimulus
Needs to be resolved