Specialized, bimodal neural systems integrate visual and tactile information in the space near the hand. Here, we show that visuo-tactile representations allow attention to influence early perceptual processing, namely, figure-ground assignment. Regions that were reached toward were more likely than other regions to be assigned as foreground figures, and hand position competed with image-based information to bias figure-ground assignment. Our findings suggest that hand position allows attention to influence visual perceptual processing and that visual processes typically viewed as unimodal can be influenced by bimodal visuo-tactile representations.
AbramsR.A.DavoliC.C.DuF.KnappW.H.PaullD. (2008). Altered vision near the hands. Cognition, 107, 1035–1047.
2.
BrainardD.H. (1997). The Psychophysics Toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433–436.
3.
di PellegrinoG.FrassinettiF. (2000). Direct evidence from parietal extinction of enhancement of visual attention near a visible hand. Current Biology, 10, 1475–1477.
4.
di PellegrinoG.LadavasE.FarneA. (1997). Seeing where your hands are. Nature, 388, 730.
5.
DriverJ.BaylisG.C. (1996). Edge-assignment and figure-ground segmentation in short-term visual matching. Cognitive Psychology, 31, 248–306.
6.
GrazianoM.S.A.GrossC.G. (1993). A bimodal map of space: Somatosensory receptive fields in the macaque putamen with corresponding visual receptive fields. Experimental Brain Research, 97, 96–109.
7.
HoffmanD.D.SinghM. (1997). Salience of visual parts. Cognition, 63, 29–78.
8.
JuleszB. (1984). A brief outline of the texton theory of human vision. Trends in Neurosciences, 7, 41–45.
9.
KanizsaG.GerbinoW. (1976). Convexity and symmetry in figure-ground assignment. In HenleM. (Ed.), Vision and artifact (pp. 25–32). New York: Springer.
10.
KimchiR.PetersonM.A. (2008). Figure-ground segmentation can occur without attention. Psychological Science, 19, 660–668.
11.
LadavasE.di PellegrinoG.FarneA.ZeloniG. (1998). Neuropsychological evidence of an integrated visuotactile representation of peripersonal space in humans. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 581–589.
12.
LoftusG.R.MassonM.E.J. (1994). Using confidence intervals in within-subject designs. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1, 476–490.
13.
MacalusoE.FrithC.D.DriverJ. (2000). Modulation of human visual cortex by crossmodal spatial attention. Science, 289, 1206–1208.
14.
PomerantzJ.R.KubovyM. (1986). Theoretical approaches to perceptual organization: Simplicity and likelihood principles. In BoffK.R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ.P. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. 2. Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 36-1–36-46). New York: Wiley.
15.
ReedC.L.BetzR.GarzaJ.P.RobertsR.J. (2010). Grab it! Biased attention in functional hand and tool space. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 236–245.
16.
ReedC.L.GrubbJ.D.SteeleC. (2006). Hands up: Attentional prioritization of space near the hand. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32, 166–177.
17.
SchendelK.RobertsonL.C. (2004). Reaching out to see: Arm position can attenuate human visual loss. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 16, 935–943.
