The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Active versus passive touch: factors influencing the transmission of somatosensory signals to primary somatosensory cortex
Abstract
Active and passive touch, respectively with and without voluntary movement on the part of the subject, are frequently reported to be equivalent in terms of the resultant perceptual abilities. This review reexamines the notion of perceptual equivalence in the light of growing evidence that the transmission of tactile inputs is diminished, or "gated," during the course of active movement. It is concluded that there is indeed gating of cutaneous inputs during active touch. In most experiments, the paradoxical observation of perceptual equivalence between active and passive touch can partly be explained by the choice of task, namely, tactile discriminations that depend on relative, and not absolute, differences in inputs. The surprising lack of evidence for any superiority of passive touch over active touch can likely be explained by several factors. First, performance with active touch may be enhanced by the motor strategy, e.g., by reducing the speed of movement at critical points, and so reducing the degree of gating, and (or) by optimally orienting the exploring digits so as to bring the most sensitive skin areas into contact with the object in question. Second, central influences, including attention and motor set, may be specifically activated during voluntary movement and contribute to enhancing performance during active touch. Thus, the gating influences associated with active touch may be offset, partly or wholly, by the combined influence of these factors to yield (near) perceptual equivalence for active and passive touch.Key words: cutaneous, gating, somatosensory evoked potentials, movement, somatosensory discrimination.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Central cancellation of self-produced tickle sensation
Blakemore, S.-J., Wolpert, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (1998) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/2870 · Cited by 1,467
Why canʼt you tickle yourself?
Blakemore, S.-J., Wolpert, D., & Frith, C. (2000) · NeuroReport · doi:10.1097/00001756-200008030-00002 · Cited by 904
Spatio-Temporal Prediction Modulates the Perception of Self-Produced Stimuli
Blakemore, S.-J., Frith, C. D., & Wolpert, D. M. (1999) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/089892999563607 · Cited by 829
The cerebellum is involved in predicting the sensory consequences of action
Blakemore, S.-J., Frith, C. D., & Wolpert, D. M. (2001) · Neuroreport · doi:10.1097/00001756-200107030-00023 · Cited by 587
BLAKEMORE, S.-J., SMITH, J., STEEL, R., JOHNSTONE, E. C., & FRITH, C. D. (2000) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291799002676 · Cited by 497
Metadata
- Authors
- Chapman, C. E.
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1994-05-01
- Volume
- 72
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 558-570
- ISSN
- 0008-4212 (ISSN-L)
- 1205-7541
- OpenAlex
- W2158460350
- Cited by
- 228
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 1.90
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Active versus passive touch: factors influencing the transmission of somatosensory signals to primary somatosensory cortex. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1139/y94-080
- The paper
- Chapman, C. E. (1994). Active versus passive touch: factors influencing the transmission of somatosensory signals to primary somatosensory cortex. Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology. https://doi.org/10.1139/y94-080
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.