% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@INPROCEEDINGS{Wolbers:145624,
author = {Wolbers, Thomas},
title = {{P}hysiological changes through sensory augmentation in
path integration: an f{MRI} study},
journal = {Cognitive processing},
volume = {15},
number = {1},
issn = {1612-4782},
reportid = {DZNE-2020-00954},
pages = {S73},
year = {2014},
abstract = {The theory of sensorimotor contingencies (SMCs) describes
qualita-tive experience as based on the dependency between
sensory inputand its preceding motor actions. To investigate
sensory processingand learning of new SMCs we used sensory
augmentation in a virtualpath integration task.
Specifically, we built a belt that maps direc-tional
information of a compass to a set of vibrating elements such
asthat the element pointing north is always activated. The
belt changesits tactile signals only by motor actions of the
belt-wearing partici-pants, i.e. when turning around.Nine
subjects wore the belt during all waking hours for
sevenweeks, 5 control subjects actively trained their
navigation, but withouta belt (age 19–32y, seven female).
Before and after the training periodwe presented in the fMRI
scanner a virtual path integration (PI) taskand a
corresponding control task with identical visual stimuli. In
halfof the trials of both tasks the belt was switched on,
coherentlyvibrating with the virtual movements of the
subjects.We used ROI analysis to concentrate on regions
relevant forspatial navigation and for sensory processing.
We used a mixed-effects ANOVA to decompose the four factors
belt on/off, belt/control subjects, PI/control task, and
before/after training. Themain effect PI[control task shows
large-scale differences in areasthat have been found to be
active in similar navigational taskssuch as medial superior
temporal cortices (MST), posterior parietalcortex (PPC),
ventral intraparietal areas, and caudate
nucleus.Additionally we found sensorimotor regions such as
supplementarymotor areas (SMA), insula, primary sensory
cortex, and precentralgyrus. The main effect belt on[off
reveals processing of the tactile signals in expected
sensory areas such as the primarysensory cortex,
supramarginal gyri, and Rolandic opercula. Insecond-level
analyses significant 2-way interactions between thebelt
on/off and pre/post training condition indicates an
involvementof Rolandic opercula, Insula, MST and PPC.
Inspection of theactivation intensities shows a significant
difference belt on[offonly in the first measurement before
the training period, but notafter the training period.In
summary, in fMRI we observe differential activations in
areasexpected for path integration tasks and tactile
stimulation. Additionally,we also found activation
differences for the belt signals well beyond the
somatosensory system, indicating that processing is not
limited to sen-sory areas but includes also higher level and
motor regions as predicted bythe theory of sensorimotor
contingencies. It is demonstrated that thebelt’s signal is
processed differently after the training period. Our
fMRIresults are also in line with subjective reports
indicating a qualitativechange in the perception of the belt
signals.},
month = {Sep},
date = {2014-09-29},
organization = {12th Biannual Conference of the German
Cognitive Science Society (Gesellschaft
für Kognitionswissenschaft), Tübingen
(Germany), 29 Sep 2014 - 2 Oct 2014},
cin = {AG Wolbers},
ddc = {150},
cid = {I:(DE-2719)1310002},
pnm = {344 - Clinical and Health Care Research (POF3-344)},
pid = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-344},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)1 / PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
url = {https://pub.dzne.de/record/145624},
}