Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing

Tags:

Anema, H. A., de Haan, A. M., Gebuis, T., & Dijkerman, H. C. (2012). Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing. Experimental Brain Research, 218(3), 373–380. doi:10.1007/s00221-012-3020-0

Abstract

Mental imagery is considered to be important for normal conscious experience. It is most frequently investigated in the visual, auditory and motor domain (imagination of movement), while the studies on tactile imagery (imagination of touch) are scarce. The current study investigated the effect of tactile and auditory imagery on the left/right discriminations of tactile and auditory stimuli. In line with our hypothesis, we observed that after tactile imagery, tactile stimuli were responded to faster as compared to auditory stimuli and vice versa. On average, tactile stimuli were responded to faster as compared to auditory stimuli, and stimuli in the imagery condition were on average responded to slower as compared to baseline performance (left/right discrimination without imagery assignment). The former is probably due to the spatial and somatotopic proximity of the fingers receiving the taps and the thumbs performing the response (button press), the latter to a dual task cost. Together, these results provide the first evidence of a behavioural effect of a tactile imagery assignment on the perception of real tactile stimuli.

Authors

Helen A. Anema1
Alyanne M. de Haan1
Titia Gebuis1
H. Chris Dijkerman1

What This Study Is About

Researchers investigated whether "mental imagery"—the ability to create sensory experiences in your mind—helps you process real-world sensations. Specifically, they wanted to know if imagining a touch (like the feeling of rough gravel) makes you faster at detecting a real physical tap.

How They Studied It

The study involved 15 participants who performed a simple speed test. They had to identify whether a real sensation—either a small vibration (tap) on their finger or a short sound (beep)—occurred on their left or right side.

Before each test, participants were shown a picture (such as marbles or gravel) and asked to imagine either the feeling of that object or the sound it makes. The researchers then measured how quickly the participants could identify the location of the real taps and beeps to see if the "mental practice" gave them a head start.

What They Found

The researchers discovered that imagining a sensation "primes" the brain for the real thing. When participants imagined a touch, they were significantly faster at identifying the location of real physical taps. Similarly, imagining a sound made them faster at identifying real beeps.

Crucially, this boost was specific: imagining a sound did not help them process touch, and imagining a touch did not help them process sound. The mental imagery only improved performance for the specific sense being "pictured" in the mind.

What This Might Mean

This suggests that mental imagery and real perception share the same "wiring" in the brain. By imagining a sensation, you are essentially warming up the specific brain circuits used to perceive the real world.

For the aphantasia community—people who experience a blind "mind's eye" or a lack of other mental senses—this research is significant. It suggests that if someone cannot voluntarily create these mental "previews," they might not receive the same sensory speed boost that others do. However, because this study only tested people who could visualize, more research is needed to see how those with aphantasia perform on the same tasks.

One Interesting Detail

The study found that participants generally found it easier to imagine sounds than to imagine the feeling of touch, yet both types of imagery were equally effective at speeding up their reaction times.

Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing

Abstract

Authors

Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing

Abstract

Authors

Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing

Abstract

Authors

Thinking about touch facilitates tactile but not auditory processing

Abstract

Authors

What This Study Is About

How They Studied It

What They Found

What This Might Mean

One Interesting Detail

What This Study Is About

How They Studied It

What They Found

What This Might Mean

One Interesting Detail

Joel Pearson

Merlin Monzel

Adam Zeman

Rebecca Keogh

Martin Reuter

Juha Silvanto

Paolo Bartolomeo

Carla Dance

Jianghao Liu

Fraser Milton