Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27959914›Full record

ArticlePloS one2016

Learning New Sensorimotor Contingencies: Effects of Long-Term Use of Sensory Augmentation on the Brain and Conscious Perception.

Sabine U König, Frank Schumann, Johannes Keyser, Caspar Goeke, Carina Krause, Susan Wache, Aleksey Lytochkin, Manuel Ebert, Vincent Brunsch, Basil Wahn and 7 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Feel the way with a vibrotactile compass: Does a navigational aid aid navigation?Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

Sabine U KönigInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5981-2025
Frank SchumannInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Johannes KeyserInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Caspar GoekeInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Carina KrauseInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Susan WacheInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Aleksey LytochkinInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Manuel EbertInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Vincent BrunschInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Basil WahnInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Kai KasparInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Saskia K NagelInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.
Tobias MeilingerMax Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany.
Heinrich BülthoffMax Planck Institute for Biological Cybernetics, Tübingen, Germany.
Thomas WolbersAging & Cognition Research Group, German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Magdeburg, Germany.
Christian BüchelNeuroImage Nord, Department of Systems Neuroscience, Hamburg University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Peter KönigInstitute of Cognitive Science, University of Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Theories of embodied cognition propose that perception is shaped by sensory stimuli and by the actions of the organism. Following sensorimotor contingency theory, the mastery of lawful relations between own behavior and resulting changes in sensory signals, called sensorimotor contingencies, is constitutive of conscious perception. Sensorimotor contingency theory predicts that, after training, knowledge relating to new sensorimotor contingencies develops, leading to changes in the activation of sensorimotor systems, and concomitant changes in perception. In the present study, we spell out this hypothesis in detail and investigate whether it is possible to learn new sensorimotor contingencies by sensory augmentation. Specifically, we designed an fMRI compatible sensory augmentation device, the feelSpace belt, which gives orientation information about the direction of magnetic north via vibrotactile stimulation on the waist of participants. In a longitudinal study, participants trained with this belt for seven weeks in natural environment. Our EEG results indicate that training with the belt leads to changes in sleep architecture early in the training phase, compatible with the consolidation of procedural learning as well as increased sensorimotor processing and motor programming. The fMRI results suggest that training entails activity in sensory as well as higher motor centers and brain areas known to be involved in navigation. These neural changes are accompanied with changes in how space and the belt signal are perceived, as well as with increased trust in navigational ability. Thus, our data on physiological processes and subjective experiences are compatible with the hypothesis that new sensorimotor contingencies can be acquired using sensory augmentation.

Indexed as

ConsciousnessLearningSpace PerceptionAdultCognitionFemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleSensorimotor CortexSleep

Identifiers

PMID27959914
PMCPMC5154504

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.