CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 473Virtual Reality Applications and ImpactsMultisensory perception and integrationSpatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction

Multisensory mechanisms in temporo-parietal cortex support self-location and first-person perspective

Open access
Ionta, Silvio, Heydrich, Lukas, Lenggenhager, Bigna, Mouthon, Michael, Fornari, Eleonora, Chapuis, Dominique, Gassert, Roger, Blanke, Olaf·2011·Neuron
DOI 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.009
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Self-consciousness has mostly been approached by philosophical enquiry and not by empirical neuroscientific study, leading to an overabundance of diverging theories and an absence of data-driven theories. Using robotic technology, we achieved specific bodily conflicts and induced predictable changes in a fundamental aspect of self-consciousness by altering where healthy subjects experienced themselves to be (self-location). Functional magnetic resonance imaging revealed that temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) activity reflected experimental changes in self-location that also depended on the first-person perspective due to visuo-tactile and visuo-vestibular conflicts. Moreover, in a large lesion analysis study of neurological patients with a well-defined state of abnormal self-location, brain damage was also localized at TPJ, providing causal evidence that TPJ encodes self-location. Our findings reveal that multisensory integration at the TPJ reflects one of the most fundamental subjective feelings of humans: the feeling of being an entity localized at a position in space and perceiving the world from this position and perspective.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

Using MR-compatible robotic visuo-tactile stroking, this study manipulated healthy participants’ self-location and first-person perspective and found that temporo-parietal junction (TPJ) activity tracked these changes. A lesion analysis in neurological patients with out-of-body experiences (OBEs) further localized abnormal self-location to the right TPJ, providing causal evidence linking TPJ to self-location.

Key findings

  • Self-location, measured by the Mental Ball Dropping task, depended on Object, Stroking, and Perspective [three-way interaction: F(1,20) = 4.4, p < 0.05]. In the body condition, the Up-group had longer RTs during synchronous (1071 ms) than asynchronous stroking (991 ms; p < 0.01), while the Down-group showed the opposite pattern (synchronous 1047 ms vs asynchronous 1138 ms; p < 0.03).
  • Questionnaire ratings showed stronger self-identification with the virtual body during synchronous (4.1) than asynchronous stroking (2.3) [F(4,80) = 13.5, p < 0.01], and stronger illusory touch during synchronous (8.1) than asynchronous stroking (2.8) [F(4,80) = 13.5, p < 0.001].
  • fMRI showed that left and right TPJ activity reflected a Stroking × Object × Perspective interaction. In left TPJ, Up-group synchronous-body BOLD was −0.14% vs asynchronous-body 0.73% [F(1,20) = 6.1, p < 0.02]; Down-group synchronous-body was 1.22% vs asynchronous-body 0.42% (p < 0.03). Right TPJ showed a similar pattern: Up-group synchronous 0.11% vs asynchronous 1.14% [F(1,20) = 7, p < 0.016]; Down-group synchronous 1.03% vs asynchronous 0.34% (p = 0.09).
  • In nine OBE patients, eight had right temporal and/or parietal damage, most often at the TPJ. VLSM showed maximal involvement of the right TPJ (MNI: 54, −52, 26; Z-score = 3.53; p < 0.01, FDR-corrected), with 32% of voxels in pSTG, 27% in middle temporal gyrus, 26% in angular gyrus, and 6% in supramarginal gyrus.

Methods

  • Healthy participants underwent fMRI with a 2 × 2 × 2 factorial design: Perspective (up; down) as a between-subjects factor and Object (body; no-body) and Stroking (synchronous; asynchronous) as within-subjects factors. A custom MR-compatible robotic device stroked participants’ backs while video goggles showed a virtual body or no body; participants performed the Mental Ball Dropping task and completed a questionnaire.
  • fMRI data were collected on a Siemens Trio 3T scanner, preprocessed with SPM8, analyzed with first-level fixed-effects and second-level random-effects models, with cluster significance at p < 0.05 FDR-corrected.
  • Lesion analysis compared nine neurological patients with OBEs due to focal brain damage against eight control patients with complex hallucinations but without abnormal self-location, self-identification, or first-person perspective. Lesions were normalized to MNI space and analyzed with voxel-based lesion symptom mapping (VLSM), including right-hemisphere lesions.

Limitations

  • The paper states that larger patient samples are needed to clarify OBE lateralization and that further work is needed to explore subjective and behavioral measures of self-location and first-person perspective, ideally within subjects. It also notes that behavioral evidence for the level-related mechanism was not significant in the Down-group and not associated with a main effect between groups, and that not all free reports were consistent with RT-based self-location.
  • The paper is cautious about interpreting right EBA activity as related to self-identification because EBA activity in the body/synchronous condition did not differ significantly from control conditions.
  • Evident from the text: the healthy sample was small (Up-group n = 11; Down-group n = 11), and the lesion groups were also small (nine OBE patients, eight controls). Perspective group assignment was based on post hoc self-report/interview rather than experimental randomization, and VLSM included only patients with right-hemisphere lesions.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.009

Cites

76 of 76 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 43 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingown data

    Lesion analysis revealed maximal lesion overlap at right angular gyrus, pSTG, and middle temporal gyrus in 7 out of 8 OBE patients.

    “Lesion analysis revealed maximal lesion overlap at the right angular gyrus, pSTG, and middle temporal gyrus in seven out of eight OBE-patients (Figure 5A).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Right TPJ BOLD response differed between synchronous and asynchronous stroking during body conditions for both groups.

    “The cluster at the right TPJ was also centered on the pSTG, and the BOLD response in this region also differed between synchronous and asynchronous stroking during the body conditions for both groups (Figure 4C).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Self-identification with virtual body was stronger during synchronous than asynchronous stroking, regardless of Perspective.

    “statistical analysis of the questionnaires (Supplemental Information) showed that, regardless of Perspective, responses to Q3 (''How strong was the feeling that the body you saw was you?'') indicated stronger self-identification [F(4,80) = 13.5;p < 0.01] with the virtual body during synchronous (4.1) than asynchronous stroking (2.3)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Illusory touch was stronger during synchronous than asynchronous stroking.

    “responses to Q5 (''How strong was the feeling that the touch you felt was located where you saw the stroking?'')indicated stronger illusory touch [F(4,80) = 13.5;p < 0.001] during the synchronous (8.1) than the asynchronous stroking (2.8; Figure 3; Supplemental Information).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    No significant differences between synchronous and asynchronous stroking in control conditions in both groups.

    “No significant differences were found between synchronous and asynchronous stroking in the control conditions in both groups (all p > 0.2; see Figures 2A and 2B).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 24
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 2

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Elevated self-location was associated with down-looking perspective and subjective reports of floating/elevation.

    “Thus, generally elevated self-location (mental ball dropping task) was associated with a down-looking perspective (Q1) and subjective reports about an elevated self-location and/or various feelings of flying, floating, rising, lightness, and being far from the body.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    82% of Down-group vs 36% of Up-group reported elevated self-location/floating.

    “This was found in 82% of participants from the Down-group (mostly in the body asynchronous condition), but only in 36% of participants from the Up-group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Right EBA showed significant Object by Stroking interaction, with higher BOLD in body/asynchronous than body/synchronous and no-body/asynchronous.

    “The ANOVA performed on the BOLD signal change in right EBA (Supplemental Information) showed a significant two-way interaction between Object and Stroking [F(1,20) = 6.56; p < 0.02], accounted for by the higher BOLD response in the body/asynchronous condition (1.2%) with respect to the body/synchronous (0.47%) and the no-body/asynchronous conditions (0.72%; all p < 0.05).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    These regions were left and right TPJ, left and right postcentral gyrus, left and right temporo-occipital cortex (EBA), and bilateral occipital lobe.

    “These regions (Table S2) were located at the left and right temporoparietal junction (TPJ), left and right postcentral gyrus (Figures 4A-4C), left and right temporo-occipital cortex (posterior middle and inferior temporal gyri, or extrastriate body area; EBA), and bilateral occipital lobe (Figure 4D).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Direction of self-location effect differs: Up-group higher during synchronous; Down-group lower during synchronous.

    “Importantly, the direction of this effect differs between the two groups: in the Up-group we found an increase of RTs (higher self-location) during the synchronous condition (as compared to the asynchronous condition), and in the Down-group we found a decrease of RTs (or lower self-location) during the synchronous condition (as compared to the asynchronous condition).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In both groups, TPJ BOLD lower in higher self-location conditions and higher in lower self-location conditions.

    “Our data show that in both groups, the magnitude of the BOLD response was lower in conditions with higher selflocation as quantified by the MBD task (synchronous stroking in the Up-group; asynchronous stroking in the Down-group), as compared to conditions with lower self-location that were associated with a higher BOLD response (asynchronous stroking in the Up-group; synchronous stroking in the”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Behavioral evidence for level-related mechanism was not significant in Down-group and no main effect between groups.

    “We note that, despite this consistency across analyzed participants (healthy subjects and patients) and measures (subjective and behavioral), the behavioral evidence for the level-related mechanism was not significant in the Down-group and not associated with a main effect between groups.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In the present study, TPJ activity was not only modulated by the visuo-tactile synchrony of stroking, but was also differently influenced by the modulation of self-location depending on the experienced direction of the first-person perspective.

    “Yet, in the present study, TPJ activity was not only modulated by the visuo-tactile synchrony of stroking, but was also differently influenced by the modulation of self-location depending on the experienced direction of the first-person perspective.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Self-identification with the virtual body (Q3) and mislocalization of touch toward the virtual body (Q5) are stronger during the synchronous stroking condition in both the Up-group and Down-group.

    “Self-identification with the virtual body (Q3) and mislocalization of touch toward the virtual body (Q5) are stronger during the synchronous stroking condition in both the Up-group and Down-group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The questionnaire items Q3 and Q5 validly measure self-identification with the virtual body and mislocalization of touch toward the virtual body.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Using robotically-controlled multisensory conflicts, the study induced changes in self-location and the first-person perspective that selectively depended on the timing between tactile stroking and visual stroking of a seen virtual body and on the subjects' spontaneously adopted first-person perspective manipulated through visuo-vestibular conflict.

    “Using robotically-controlled multisensory conflicts, we induced changes in two fundamental aspects of self-consciousness-self-location and the first-person perspective-that selectively depended on the timing between the tactile stroking and the ''visual'' stroking of a seen virtual body and on the subjects' spontaneously adopted first-person perspective that was manipulated through visuovestibular”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingown data

    Only one patient suffered from damage to the left TPJ.

    “Note that only one patient suffered from damage to the left TPJ.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    In both perspective groups, the body/synchronous condition leads to a drift in self-location toward the virtual body, but in opposite directions depending on the experienced perspective.

    “In both perspective groups, the body/synchronous condition leads to a drift in self-location toward the virtual body, but in opposite directions depending on the experienced perspective.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The mental ball dropping task validly quantifies self-location.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The subjective changes about the location and perspective of the self were reflected in TPJ activity and causally linked to TPJ damage in a group of neurological patients.

    “These subjective changes about the location and perspective of the self were reflected in TPJ activity and causally linked to TPJ damage in a group of neurological patients.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    Differences between synchronous and asynchronous stroking conditions occurred only in the body conditions, not in the control conditions, and in opposite directions between Up- and Down-group.

    “Note the differences between synchronous and asynchronous stroking conditions only in the body conditions (not in the control conditions) and in opposite directions between Up-and Down-group.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A Stroking by Object by Perspective interaction may reflect induced changes in self-location; a Stroking by Object interaction may reflect self-identification.

    “Only brain regions revealing a Stroking by Object by Perspective interaction may reflect the induced changes in self-location, whereas brain activity revealing a Stroking by Object interaction may reflect self-identification with the seen virtual body.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Up-group relied more on vestibular/somatosensory cues; Down-group more on visual gravitational cues.

    “Accordingly, we argue that in participants from the Up-group, there is stronger reliance on vestibular (and somatosensory) cues than on visual gravitational cues (from the seen virtual body), whereas participants from the Down-group show the opposite pattern.”
    • Also stated in: § Neuron · plain
      “Based on these findings, we argue that in participants from the Down-group there is stronger reliance on visual gravitational cues (from the seen virtual body) than on vestibular (and somatosensory) cues from the participants' physical bodies (in a supine position in the scanner) and that participants from the Up-group show the opposite pattern (stronger reliance on vestibular and somatosensory”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationown data

    Up-group's self-identification and spatial closeness during synchronous stimulation were associated with compatible changes in self-location (low position and elevation drift).

    “We argue that this was associated-at least partly-with compatible changes in self-location (mental ball dropping task): a low position or level of self-location (comparable to those indicated during the control conditions; see blue line in Figure 2A) and a drift in self-location characterized by an elevation during synchronous versus asynchronous stroking (difference between the two gray bodies in”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Synchronous stroking results in an illusory drift of self-location in direction of seen virtual body for both groups, but due to differences in experienced first-person perspective, this drift occurs in opposite directions.

    “It suggests that synchronous stroking results in an illusory drift of self-location in the direction of the seen virtual body for both groups, but-due to the differences in the experienced direction of the first-person perspective-this drift occurs in opposite directions (in the upward direction for the Up-group; in the downward direction for the Down-group).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Such neurons discharge when the trunk or face is touched or when an approaching stimulus is seen close to the body.

    “and such neurons discharge when the trunk or face is touched or when an approaching stimulus is seen close to the body (Bremmer et al., 2002;Gru ¨sser et al., 1990).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites Bremmer et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gru ¨sser et al., 1990

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    fMRI work consistently identified the vestibular cortex in the parietal operculum and the posterior insula.

    “fMRI work consistently identified the vestibular cortex in the parietal operculum (Eickhoff et al., 2006;Fasold et al., 2002) and the posterior insula (Bucher et al., 1998;Fasold et al., 2002;Vitte et al., 1996).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Eickhoff et al., 2006

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Fasold et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Bucher et al., 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The receptive fields of these neurons are most often large and bilateral, may encompass the face, trunk, hemibody, or entire body, and have bimodal visuo-tactile receptive fields anchored to the body.

    “The receptive fields are most often large and bilateral, may encompass the face, trunk, hemibody, or entire body, and have bimodal visuo-tactile receptive fields that are anchored to the body (Bremmer et al., 2002;Duhamel et al., 1998;Gru ¨sser et al., 1990).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Bremmer et al., 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Duhamel et al., 1998 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Gru ¨sser et al., 1990

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Clinical neuroanatomical data translate to fMRI data in healthy participants, highlighting TPJ as important for self-consciousness related to self-location and first-person perspective.

    “They also show that the detailed analysis of such clinical neuroanatomical data on self-consciousness translate to functional neuroimaging data on self-consciousness in healthy participants, highlighting collectively the significance of the TPJ as an important brain structure for self-consciousness related to self-location and the first-person perspective (Figure 5C).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Right TPJ is classical lesion site associated with visuo-spatial neglect, which disturbs egocentric spatial relationship, perspective taking, body perception.

    “The right TPJ is the classical lesion site and side associated with visuo-spatial neglect (Halligan et al., 2003;Karnath et al., 2001), a clinical condition shown to disturb the patient's egocentric spatial relationship with extrapersonal space, visuo-spatial perspective taking (Farrell and Robertson, 2000), and own body perception such as somatoparaphrenia (Vallar and Ronchi, 2009).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Halligan et al., 2003

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Karnath et al., 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Farrell and Robertson, 2000

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    TPJ implicated bilaterally but right lateralized in perspective taking, multisensory integration, imagined self-location changes.

    “A bilateral, but right lateralized, implication of the TPJ has also been observed during egocentric visuo-spatial perspective taking (Maguire et al., 1998;Ruby and Decety, 2001), multisensory integration, as well as imagined changes in self-location (Arzy et al., 2006;Blanke et al., 2005;Schwabe et al., 2009) in healthy subjects.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Maguire et al., 1998

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Ruby and Decety, 2001

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Arzy et al., 2006 source

      Not checked in the free run.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Other studies have revealed the role of the EBA in the perception, mental imagery, and sensorimotor coding of human bodies.

    “Finally, other studies have revealed the role of the EBA in the perception (Downing et al., 2001;Grossman and Blake, 2002;Urgesi et al., 2007), mental imagery (Arzy et al., 2006;Blanke et al., 2010), and sensorimotor coding of human bodies (Astafiev et al., 2004)”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites Downing et al., 2001 source

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Grossman and Blake, 2002

      Not checked in the free run.

    • cites Urgesi et al., 2007

      Not checked in the free run.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    EBA damage leads to deficits in body, but not face, recognition.

    “and EBA damage leads to deficits in body, but not face, recognition (Moro et al., 2008).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Moro et al., 2008

      Not checked in the free run.

26 of 26

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The mental ball dropping task validly quantifies self-location.

    “self-location task (mental ball dropping)”
    “as quantified by the MBD task”

  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The questionnaire items Q3 and Q5 validly measure self-identification with the virtual body and mislocalization of touch toward the virtual body.

    “Questionnaire Scores Self-identification with the virtual body (Q3) and mislocalization of touch toward the virtual body (Q5)”
    “Our questionnaire data (Q3) show”
2 of 2

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Limited vestibular nuclei connectivity with the temporoparietal junction in the dissociative subtype may negatively affect the ability to understand one's own self-orientation in space and can lead to feelings of disembodiment, where body ownership is compromised and one's own mental agency to exert movement is limited.

    “Harricharan et al. (2017) showed that as compared to healthy individuals and individuals with classic PTSD, the dissociative subtype showed limited vestibular nuclei connectivity with the temporoparietal junction within the parieto-insular vestibular cortex, a pattern of neural disruption that may negatively affect the ability to understand one’s own self-orientation in space and can lead to feel”

    From How Processing of Sensory Information From the Internal and External Worlds Shape the Perception and Engagement With the World in the Aftermath of Trauma: Implications for PTSD (2021) · cites this paper as Ionta et al., 2011

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Other studies found that the temporo-parietal junction, primary somatosensory cortex, premotor cortex, cingulate cortex, and posterior superior temporal gyrus are related to illusory changes in self location.

    “Other studies found that the temporo‐parietal junction, primary somatosensory cortex, premotor cortex, cingulate cortex, and the posterior superior temporal gyrus are related to illusory changes in the self location (Guterstam, Björnsdotter, Gentile, & Ehrsson, 2015; Ionta et al., 2011).”

    From Neural bases of the bodily self as revealed by electrical brain stimulation: A systematic review (2023) · cites this paper as Ionta et al., 2011

    The fMRI Data and Self-Location section links illusory changes in self-location to activity in the left and right temporo-parietal junction. It reports activity in other regions, including the postcentral gyrus, but says no other region showed BOLD changes reflecting the illusory changes in self-location. This source therefore does not support attributing the full list of regions to that finding. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The two neuroimaging studies by Ionta et al. (2011) and Petkova et al. (2011) provide evidence that body ownership and self-location are distinct components of bodily self-consciousness.

    “Taken together, these two neuroimaging studies seem to provide a case for validating the assumption that there are at least two components of bodily self-consciousness, i.e., self-location and body ownership, that are distinct from one another.”

    From Bodily ownership and self-location: Components of bodily self-consciousness (2013) · cites this paper as Ionta et al., 2011

  • In Ionta et al. (2011), participants reported a shift in bodily self from physical body to a spatial position closer to the virtual body, and some also reported a sense of ownership for the virtual body.

    “Participants in Ionta's study reported a feeling that their bodily self shifted from the space occupied by their physical body to a spatial position closer to where they saw the virtual body, and some participants also reported a sense of ownership for the virtual body.”

    From Bodily ownership and self-location: Components of bodily self-consciousness (2013) · cites this paper as Ionta et al., 2011

  • In Ionta et al. (2011), the right and left TPJ were critically involved in the full body illusion.

    “They did not report any specific activation in the vPMc or the PPc, but showed that the right and left TPJ were critically involved in the FBI (see Figure 2; black dots).”

    From Bodily ownership and self-location: Components of bodily self-consciousness (2013) · cites this paper as Ionta et al., 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Ionta, S., Heydrich, L., Lenggenhager, B., Mouthon, M., Fornari, E., Chapuis, D., Gassert, R., & Blanke, O.
Affiliations
  • École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (CH)
  • University Hospital of Geneva (CH)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (CH)
Corresponding author
Blanke, Olaf
ORCID
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-04
Volume
70
Issue
2
Pages
363-374
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.neuron.2011.03.009
OpenAlex
W2170938715
Semantic Scholar
3413b5eba1da94775bcabe73e7216482f361e3e5
Cited by
473
References
76
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 26 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 40 · 2018: 29 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 42 · 2012: 20
FWCI
62.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Infoscience (Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • IRIS (submittedVersion)
  • SERVAL (Université de Lausanne) (submittedVersion)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Spatial Neglect and Hemispheric Dysfunction
Keywords
self-localization, first-person perspective, self-consciousness, temporoparietal junction, multisensory integration, body schema, brain lesions
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Body Image, Brain Injuries, Brain Mapping, Diagnostic Imaging, Female, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Parietal Lobe, Photic Stimulation, Surveys and Questionnaires, Reaction Time, Robotics, Self Concept, Space Perception, Temporal Lobe, Touch, User-Computer Interface, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-10-09.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-09.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review