Cited by 63Multisensory perception and integrationTactile and Sensory InteractionsVirtual Reality Applications and Impacts

Mapping nociceptive stimuli in a peripersonal frame of reference: Evidence from a temporal order judgment task

Open access
De Paepe, Annick L., Crombez, Geert, Spence, Charles, Legrain, Valéry·2014·Neuropsychologia

Abstract

The ability to localize nociceptive stimuli on the body surface is essential for an organism to respond appropriately to potential physical threats. This ability not only requires a representation of the space of the observer׳s body, but also of the external space with respect to their body. Therefore, localizing nociceptive stimuli requires coordinating multiple senses into an integrated frame of reference. The peripersonal frame of reference allows for the coding of the position of somatosensory stimuli on the body surface and the position of stimuli occurring close to the body (e.g., visual stimuli). Intensively studied for touch, this topic has been largely ignored when it comes to nociception. Here, we investigated, using a temporal order judgment task, whether the spatial perception of nociceptive stimuli is coordinated with that of proximal visual stimuli into an integrated representation of peripersonal space. Participants judged which of two nociceptive stimuli, one presented to either hand, had been presented first. Each pair of nociceptive stimuli was preceded by lateralized visual cues presented either unilaterally or bilaterally, and either close to, or far from, the participant׳s body. The perception of nociceptive stimuli was biased in favor of the stimulus delivered on the hand adjacent to the unilateral visual cue, especially when the cue was presented near the participant׳s hand. These results therefore suggest that a peripersonal frame of reference is used to map the position of nociceptive stimuli in multisensory space. We propose that peripersonal space constitutes a kind of margin of safety around the body to alert an organism to possible threats.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.01.016

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., & Jessell, T. M. (2000). Pinciples of neuroscience (4 th Ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
De Paepe, A. L., Crombez, G., Spence, C., & Legrain, V.
Affiliations
  • Ghent University (BE)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
Venue
Neuropsychologia
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-04
Volume
56
Pages
219-228
ISSN
0028-3932 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2052120603
Cited by
63
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 3
FWCI
11.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuropsychologia (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Ghent University Academic Bibliography (Ghent University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • DIAL (Catholic University of Leuven) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Research Foundation Flanders (FWO, Belgium)
  • Fund for Scientific Research of French speaking Community of Belgium (F.R.S.-FNRS)
  • Bilateral Scientific Cooperation Oxford-Ghent University (BOF10/BIP/015)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Multisensory perception and integration
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Virtual Reality Applications and Impacts
Keywords
peripersonal space, nociception, pain localization, temporal order judgment, multisensory integration, somatosensory perception, visual cues, body surface potential mapping, safety margin, threat detection
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Cues, Female, Hand, Humans, Judgment, Functional Laterality, Male, Physical Stimulation, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Space Perception, Young Adult, Nociception

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.

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