Can we feel our body where we are told it is?

The sense that our body belongs to us (body ownership) and the perception of where it is located in space (body spatial perception) seem obvious and stable. In everyday life, we rarely question these experiences. However, research in neuroscience has shown that they are more flexible than they appear: they result not only from the information we receive through the senses, but also from our expectations and beliefs.

In a recent study, Giorgia Tosi and colleagues investigated the extent to which verbal information can alter body spatial perception and whether such changes influence body ownership. To address this question, they used a virtual reality version of the classic Rubber Hand Illusion (RHI), a paradigm widely used to study bodily self-consciousness.

In the study, participants observed an avatar seated in front of them through a virtual reality headset. The avatar’s virtual hand was slightly displaced relative to the real position of the participant’s hand. At a certain moment, participants received a verbal instruction: some participants were (misleadingly) informed that their hand had been moved closer to the virtual hand, while others received correct information. Importantly, in both cases, the hand was always placed again in exactly the same position.

The results showed that verbal information alone was sufficient to alter perceived hand position. When participants believed that their hand had been displaced, they tended to localize it closer to the virtual hand, even though it had never actually moved. These findings show that beliefs and expectations can directly influence how the brain represents the body in space, demonstrating a top‑down modulation of body spatial perception.

Interestingly, this change in spatial perception was not accompanied by an increase in body ownership over the virtual hand. The sense of ownership increased only when participants received synchronous multisensory stimulation, that is, when what they saw coincided in time and space with what they felt through touch.

This study therefore highlights an important dissociation: body spatial perception and body ownership are related, but distinct processes. The brain does not merely integrate sensory information; it is also shaped by prior beliefs and expectations. This study was published in the scientific journal Psychological Research, in the article Trust me, you are there: The role of verbal manipulation on embodiment and body localization, as a part of research project 101/22 - I am where I believe my body is, supported by the Bial Foundation.

ABSTRACT

Body ownership (the perception of the body as belonging to oneself) and body spatial perception arise from multisensory integration and can be altered by body illusions (e.g., Rubber Hand Illusion, RHI). In the RHI, synchronous visuo-tactile stimulation elicits ownership over a fake hand and shifts the perceived real hand position (Proprioceptive Drift). This study investigated whether altering body spatial predictions through verbal manipulation affects ownership in a virtual RHI (vRHI). In the Misleading Information Condition, participants were told their hand would be moved closer to the virtual hand. In the Correct Information Condition (Control Condition), participants were told their hand would be moved and then put back in its original position. Embodiment and perceived hand position were assessed at baseline (T0), after verbal manipulation (T1), and after vRHI induction (T2). Results showed that verbal manipulation altered spatial predictions: in the Misleading Information Condition, proprioceptive drift at T1 increased. However, after the vRHI, the drift was lower in the Misleading Information Condition than in the Control condition. Embodiment increased only after the vRHI. Thus, manipulating spatial predictions influenced hand position but not embodiment, revealing top-down modulation of body spatial perception. In contrast, multisensory illusion affected perceived position and embodiment, independently of prior verbal manipulations, suggesting a possible distinction between these processes.