Abstract

Some investigators of the rubber hand illusion (RHI) have suggested that when standard RHI induction procedures are employed, if the rubber hand is experienced by participants as owned, their corresponding biological hands are experienced as disowned. Others have demurred: drawing upon a variety of experimental data and conceptual considerations, they infer that experience of the RHI might include the experience of a supernumerary limb, but that experienced disownership of biological hands does not occur. Indeed, some investigators even categorically deny that any experimental paradigm has been employed or any evidence can be adduced to support the claim that disownership experiences occur during the RHI. It goes without saying that RHI experiences can be elusive, and that there is some evidence to support claims that supernumerary limb experiences can sometimes occur. Here, however, we test the claim that the conscious experience of disownership can occur during the RHI. In order to test this claim, we developed two new online proxies—onset time for the illusion and illusion duration—and combined these with established questionnaires that concern the conscious contents of the RHI, in particular ownership/disownership experiences. Both online proxy data and post hoc questionnaire data converge in supporting the claim that disownership experiences do occur, at least when the left hand is the object of investigation. Our findings that onset time and illusion duration are reliable measures suggest that investigations of the RHI stand to benefit by devoting more attention to data collected while the RHI is being experienced, in particular data concerning temporal dynamics.

Highlights

  • Rubber hand illusion In daily life we assume that hands belong to us when they are connected to our bodies in the usual way, and that artificial hands not so connected cannot be ours

  • For trials when participants did not step on the right pedal before cessation of the stroking, onset time (OT) was recorded as 300 s; this ensured that no cells were left empty. (In Experiment 3 we show that this methodological compromise did not contaminate our data.) A one-way repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) on OT showed a significant difference between synchronous and asynchronous stroking (F(1, 31) = 34.193, p < 0.001, ηp2 = 0.5245)

  • Discussion for Experiment 2 In this experiment, having already established that OT can serve as a reliable online proxy for the rubber hand illusion (RHI) even when participants are unaware of what type of illusion to expect, we focused even more directly on the disownership hypothesis

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Rubber hand illusion In daily life we assume that hands belong to us when they are connected to our bodies in the usual way, and that artificial hands not so connected cannot be ours. Tastevin (1937) produced evidence to suggest that artificial hands could be experienced as belonging to self when participants look at an artificial hand that is appropriately aligned with body position and posture (cf., Schaefer, Heinze, & Rotte, 2009; Ferri, Chiarelli, Merla, Gallese, & Costantini, 2013) This belonging or ownership illusion was replicated by Botvinick and Cohen (1998) under experimental conditions that incorporated tactile sensation. Because the illusion can develop so quickly, amazed participants often spontaneously report that the rubber hand “comes alive,” that it belongs to self (Ehrsson, 2012) This startling experience of ownership for a “hand” can even be elicited when participants are looking at nothing but empty space, provided that certain minimal conditions are satisfied, in particular the synchrony of stroking (Guterstam, Gentile, & Ehrsson, 2013)

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call