The space around the body has been defined as action space (peripersonal space) and a social space (interpersonal space). Within the current debate about the characteristics of these spaces, here we investigated the functional properties and plasticity of action and social space in developmental age. To these aims, children with typical development and autism spectrum disorders were submitted to Reaching- and Comfort-distance tasks, to assess peripersonal and interpersonal space, respectively. Participants approached a person (confederate) or an object and stopped when they thought they could reach the stimulus (Reaching-distance task), or they felt comfortable with stimulus’ proximity (Comfort-distance task). Both tasks were performed before and after a cooperative tool-use training, in which participant and confederate actively cooperated to reach tokens by using either a long (Experiment 1) or a short (Experiment 2) tool. Results showed that in both groups, peripersonal space extended following long-tool-use but not short-tool-use training. Conversely, in typical development, but not in autism spectrum disorders children, interpersonal space toward confederate reduced following the cooperative tool-use training. These findings reveal that action and social spaces are functionally dissociable both in typical and atypical development, and that action but not social space regulation is intact in children with autism.
AielloJ. R. (1987). Human spatial behavior. In StokolsD.AltmanI. (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 359–504). New York, NY: John Wiley.
2.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing. doi:10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596.744053.
3.
AnelliF.CandiniM.CappellettiM.OliveriM.FrassinettiF. (2015). The remapping of time by active tool-use. PLoS ONE, 10(12), e0146175. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0146175
4.
Baron-CohenS.LeslieA. M.FrithU. (1985). Does the autistic child have a “theory of mind”?Cognition, 21, 37–46.
BertiA.FrassinettiF. (2000). When far becomes near: Remapping of space by tool use. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 12, 415–420. doi:10.1162/089892900562237
7.
BourgeoisJ.FarnèA.CoelloY. (2014). Costs and benefits of tool-use on the perception of reachable space. Acta Psychologica, 148, 91–95.
8.
BrozzoliC.EhrssonH.FarnèA. (2014). Multisensory representation of the space near the hand: From perception to action and inter individual interactions. The Neuroscientist, 20, 122–135. doi:10.1177/1073858413511153
9.
BrozzoliC.MakinT. R.CardinaliL.HolmesN. P.FarnèA. (2012). Peripersonal space: A multisensory interface for body–object interactions. In MurrayM. M.WallaceM. T. (Eds.), The neural bases of multisensory processes (pp. 449–466). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
10.
CaçolaP.GabbardC. (2012). Modulating peripersonal and extrapersonal reach space via tool use: A comparison between 6- to 12-year-olds and young adults. Experimental Brain Research, 218, 321–330. doi:10.1007/s00221-012-3017-8
11.
CandiniM.GiubertiV.ManattiniA.GrittaniS.di PellegrinoG.FrassinettiF. (2017). Personal space regulation in childhood autism: Effects of social interaction and person’s perspective. Autism Research, 10, 144–154. doi:10.1002/aur.1637
12.
CartaudA.RuggieroG.OttL.IachiniT.CoelloY. (2018). Physiological response to facial expressions in peripersonal space determines interpersonal distance in a social interaction context. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, Article 657. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00657
13.
CoelloY.BartoloA.AmiriB.HoudayerE.DerambureP. (2008). Perceiving what is reachable depends on motor representations: A study using transcranial magnetic stimulation. PLoS ONE, 3(8), e2862. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0002862
14.
CostantiniM.AmbrosiniE.SinigagliaC.GalleseV. (2011). Tool-use observation makes far objects ready-to-hand. Neuropsychologia, 49, 2658–2663. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.05.013
15.
DeanL. M.WillisF. N.LaRoccoJ. M. (1976). Invasion of personal space as a function of age, sex, and race. Psychological Reports, 38, 959–965.
16.
di PellegrinoG.LàdavasE. (2015). Peripersonal space in the brain. Neuropsychologia, 66, 126–133. doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.11.011
17.
DoseyM. A.MeiselsM. (1969). Personal space and self-protection. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11, 93–97.
18.
FarnèA.IrikiA.LàdavasE. (2005). Shaping multisensory action–space with tools: Evidence from patients with cross-modal extinction. Neuropsychologia, 43, 238–248.
19.
GabbardC.CordovaA.LeeS. (2007). Examining the effects of postural constraints on estimating reach. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 242–246.
20.
GessaroliE.SantelliE.di PellegrinoG.FrassinettiF. (2013). Personal space regulation in childhood autism spectrum disorders. PLoS ONE, 8:, e74959.
21.
HallE. (1966). Distances in man: The hidden dimension. New York, NY: Double Day.
22.
HaswellC.IzawaJ.DowellL.MostofskyS.ShadmehrR. (2009). Representation of internal models of action in the autistic brain. Nature Neuroscience, 12, 970–972. doi:10.1038/nn.2356
23.
HaydukL. A. (1978). Personal space: An evaluative and orienting overview. Psychological Bulletin, 85, 117–134.
24.
HaydukL. A. (1983). Personal space: Where we now stand. Psychological Bulletin, 94, 293–335.
25.
HunleyS. B.MarkerA. M.LourencoS. F. (2017). Individual differences in the flexibility of peripersonal space. Experimental Psychology, 64, 49–55. doi:10.1027/1618-3169/a000350
26.
IachiniT.CoelloY.FrassinettiF.RuggieroG. (2014). Body space in social interactions: A comparison of reaching and comfort distance in immersive virtual reality. PLoS ONE, 9(11), e111511. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0111511
27.
IachiniT.PagliaroS.RuggieroG. (2015). Near or far? It depends on my impression: Moral information and spatial behavior in virtual interactions. Acta Psychologica, 161, 131–136. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.09.003
28.
Johnson-FreyH. S. (2003). Cortical mechanisms of human tool use. Taking action: Cognitive neuroscience perspectives on the problem of intentional acts. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
29.
Johnson-FreyH. S. (2004). The neural bases of complex tool use in humans. Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 71–78.
30.
LinkenaugerS. A.LernerM. D.RamenzoniV. C.ProffittD. R. (2012). A perceptual-motor deficit predicts social and communicative impairments in individuals with autism spectrum disorders. Autism Research, 5, 352–362. doi:10.1002/aur.1248
31.
LongoM. R.LourencoS. F. (2006). On the nature of near space: Effects of tool use and the transition to far space. Neuropsychologia, 44, 977–981.
32.
LongoM. R.LourencoS. F. (2007). Space perception and body morphology: Extent of near space scales with arm length. Experimental Brain Research, 177, 285–290.
33.
LordC.RisiS.LambrechtL.CookE. H.Jr.LeventhalB. L.Di LavoreP. C.. . . RutterM. (2000). The autism diagnostic observation schedule-generic: A standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 30, 205–223.
34.
MakinT. R.HolmesN. P.BrozzoliC.FarnèA. (2012). Keeping the world at hand: Rapid visuomotor processing for hand–object interactions. Experimental Brain Research, 219, 421–428. doi:10.1007/s00221-012-3089-5
35.
MakinT. R.HolmesN. P.BrozzoliC.RossettiY.FarnèA. (2009). Coding of visual space during motor preparation: Approaching objects rapidly modulate corti-cospinal excitability in hand-centered coordinates. Journal of Neuroscience, 29, 11841–11851.
36.
MaravitaA.IrikiA. (2004). Tools for the body (schema). Trends in Cognitive Science, 8, 79–86.
37.
MariM.CastielloU.MarksD.MarraffaC.PriorM. (2003). The reach-to-grasp movement in children with autism spectrum disorder. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 358, 393–403. doi:10.1098/rstb.2002.1205
38.
MartelM.CardinaliL.RoyA. C.FarnèA. (2016). Tool use: An open window into body representation and its plasticity. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 33, 82–101. doi:10.1080/02643294.2016.1167678
39.
MoseleyR. L.PulvermullerF. (2018). What can autism teach us about the role of sensorimotor systems in higher cognition? New clues from studies on language, action semantics, and abstract emotional concept processing. Cortex, 100, 149–190. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2017.11.019
40.
OccelliV.SpenceC.ZampiniM. (2011). Audiotactile interactions in front and rear space. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 35, 589–598. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.004
41.
PatanèI.FarnèA.FrassinettiF. (2017). Cooperative tool-use reveals peripersonal and interpersonal spaces are dissociable. Cognition, 166, 13–22. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.04.013
42.
PatanèI.IachiniT.FarnèA.FrassinettiF. (2016). Disentangling action from social space: Tool-use differently shapes the space around us. PLoS ONE, 11(5), e0154247. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0154247
43.
PellencinE.PaladinoM. P.HerbelinB.SerinoA. (2018). Social perception of others shapes one’s own multisensory peripersonal space. Cortex, 104, 163–179. doi:10.1016/j.cortex.2017.08.033
44.
PerryA.Levy-GigiE.Richter-LevinG.Shamay-TsooryS. G. (2015). Interpersonal distance and social anxiety in autistic spectrum disorders: A behavioral and ERP study. Social Neuroscience, 10, 354–365.
45.
PerryA.RubinstenbO.PeledL.Shamay-TsooryS. G. (2013). Don’t stand so close to me: A behavioral and ERP study of preferred interpersonal distance. NeuroImage, 83, 761–769.
46.
ReynaudE.LesourdM.NavarroJ.OsiurakF. (2016). On the neurocognitive origins of human tool use: A critical review of neuroimaging data. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Review, 64, 421–437. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.03.009
47.
RizzolattiG.FadigaL.FogassiL.GalleseV. (1997). The space around us. Science, 277, 190–191.
48.
RizzolattiG.ScandolaraC.MatelliM.GentilucciM. (1981). Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys. II. Visual responses. Behavioural Brain Research, 2, 147–163. doi:10.1016/0166-4328(81)90053-x
49.
RochatP. (1995). Early objectification of the self. In RochatP. (Ed.), Advances in Psychology Book Series: The self in infancy (pp. 53–71). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
50.
SchoplerE.ReichlerR. J.RennerB. R. (1988). The Childhood Autism Rating Scale (CARS). Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
51.
SenjuA. (2013). Atypical development of spontaneous social cognition in autism spectrum disorders. Brain Development, 35, 96–101. doi:10.1016/j.braindev.2012.08.002
52.
SeveryL. J.ForsythD. R.WagnerP. J. (1979). A multimethod assessment of personal space development in female and male, Black and White children. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 4, 68–86. doi:10.1007/BF01006352
53.
SommerR. (1959). Studies in personal space. Sociometry, 22, 247–260.
54.
SommerR. (2002). From personal space to cyberspace. In BechtelR. B.ChurchmanA. (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 647–660). New York, NY: Wiley.
55.
SpositoA.BologniniN.VallarG.MaravitaA. (2012). Extension of perceived arm length following tool-use: Clues to plasticity of body metrics. Neuropsychologia, 50, 2187–2194.
56.
StrubeM. J.WernerC. (1982). Interpersonal distance and personal space: A conceptual and methodological note. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 6, 163–170.
57.
TaffouM.Viaud-DelmonI. (2014). Cynophobic fear adaptively extends peri-personal space. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 5, Article 122. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2014.00122
58.
WechslerD. (2003). Wechsler Intelligence Scale for children (4th ed.). San Antonia, TX: PsychCorp.
59.
WittJ. K.ProffittD. R. (2008). Action-specific influences on distance perception: A role for motor simulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 1479–1492.
60.
WittJ. K.ProffittD. R.EpsteinW. (2005). Tool use affects perceived distance, but only when you intend to use it. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 880–888.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
