Multisensory visuo-tactile context learning enhances the guidance of unisensory visual search

Does multisensory distractor-target context learning enhance visual search over and above unisensory learning? To address this, we had participants perform a visual search task under both uni- and multisensory conditions. Search arrays consisted of one Gabor target that differed from three homogeneous distractors in orientation; participants had to discriminate the target’s orientation. In the multisensory session, additional tactile (vibration-pattern) stimulation was delivered to two fingers of each hand, with the odd-one-out tactile target and the distractors co-located with the corresponding visual items in half the trials; the other half presented the visual array only. In both sessions, the visual target was embedded within identical (repeated) spatial arrangements of distractors in half of the trials. The results revealed faster response times to targets in repeated versus non-repeated arrays, evidencing ‘contextual cueing’. This effect was enhanced in the multisensory session—importantly, even when the visual arrays presented without concurrent tactile stimulation. Drift–diffusion modeling confirmed that contextual cueing increased the rate at which task-relevant information was accumulated, as well as decreasing the amount of evidence required for a response decision. Importantly, multisensory learning selectively enhanced the evidence-accumulation rate, expediting target detection even when the context memories were triggered by visual stimuli alone.

Oculomotor freezing reflects tactile temporal expectation and aids tactile perception

The oculomotor system keeps the eyes steady in expectation of visual events. Here, recording microsaccades while people performed a tactile, frequency discrimination task enabled us to test whether the oculomotor system shows an analogous preparatory response for unrelated tactile events. We manipulated the temporal predictability of tactile targets using tactile cues, which preceded the target by either constant (high predictability) or variable (low predictability) time intervals. We find that microsaccades are inhibited prior to tactile targets and more so for constant than variable intervals, revealing a tight crossmodal link between tactile temporal expectation and oculomotor action. These findings portray oculomotor freezing as a marker of crossmodal temporal expectation. Moreover, microsaccades occurring around the tactile target presentation are associated with reduced task performance, suggesting that oculomotor freezing mitigates potential detrimental, concomitant effects of microsaccades and revealing a crossmodal coupling between tactile perception and oculomotor action.

When Temporal Certainty Doesn't Help

In a dynamically changing environment, the ability to capture regularities in our sensory input helps us generate predictions about future events. In most sensory systems, the basic finding is clear: Knowing when something will happen improves performance on it [Nobre, A. C., & van Ede, F. (2017). Anticipated moments: Temporal structure in attention. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 19, 34–48, 2017]. We here examined the impact of temporal predictions on a less-explored modality: touch. Participants were instructed to detect a brief target embedded in an ongoing vibrotactile stimulus. Unbeknownst to them, the experiment had two timing conditions: In one part, the time of target onset was fixed and thus temporally predictable, whereas in the other, it could appear at a random time within the ongoing stimulation. We found a clear modulation of detection thresholds due to temporal predictability: Contrary to other sensory systems, detecting a predictable tactile target was worse relative to unpredictable targets. We discuss our findings within the framework of tactile suppression.

Experimentally induced pain does not influence updating of peripersonal space and body representations following tool-use

Representations of the body and peripersonal space can be distorted for people with some chronic pain conditions. Experimental pain induction can give rise to similar, but transient distortions in healthy individuals. However, spatial and bodily representations are dynamic, and constantly update as we interact with objects in our environment. It is unclear whether induced pain disrupts the mechanisms involved in updating these representations. In the present study, we sought to investigate the effect of induced pain on the updating of peripersonal space and body representations during and following tool-use. We compared performance under three conditions (pain, active placebo, neutral) on a visuotactile crossmodal congruency task and a tactile distance judgement task to measure updating of peripersonal space and body representations, respectively. We induced pain by applying 1% capsaicin cream to the arm, and for placebo we used a gel that induced non-painful warming. Consistent with previous findings, the difference in crossmodal interference from visual distractors in the same compared to opposite visual field to the tactile target was less when tools were crossed than uncrossed. This suggests an extension of peripersonal space to incorporate the tips of the tools. Also consistent with previous findings, estimates of the felt distance between two points (tactile distance judgements) decreased after active tool-use. In contrast to our predictions, however, we found no evidence that pain interfered with performance on either task when compared to the control conditions. This suggests that the updating of peripersonal space and body representations is not disrupted by induced pain. Therefore, acute pain does not account for the distorted representations of the body and peripersonal space that can endure in people with chronic pain conditions.

Neuronal activity in somatosensory cortex related to tactile exploration

The very light contact forces (∼0.60 N) applied by the fingertips during tactile exploration reveal a clearly optimized sensorimotor strategy. To investigate the cortical mechanisms involved with this behavior, we recorded 230 neurons in the somatosensory cortex (S1), as two monkeys scanned different surfaces with the fingertips in search of a tactile target without visual feedback. During the exploration, the monkeys, like humans, carefully controlled the finger forces. High-friction surfaces offering greater tangential shear force resistance to the skin were associated with decreased normal contact forces. The activity of one group of neurons was modulated with either the normal or tangential force, with little or no influence from the orthogonal force component. A second group responded to kinetic friction or the ratio of tangential to normal forces rather than responding to a specific parameter, such as force magnitude or direction. A third group of S1 neurons appeared to respond to particular vectors of normal and tangential force on the skin. Although 45 neurons correlated with scanning speed, 32 were also modulated by finger forces, suggesting that forces on the finger should be considered as the primary parameter encoding the skin compliance and that finger speed is a secondary parameter that co-varies with finger forces. Neurons (102) were also tested with different textures, and the activity of 62 of these increased or decreased in relation to the surface friction.