When we pause and relax, strange sensations might arise; a tingling in the hand, an itch on the foot, often without any clear cause. These “ghost” bodily experiences, known as spontaneous sensations (SPS), offer a unique window into how we perceive our bodies. In an online experimental study of 175 participants, we examined how SPS differ across body regions (hands, feet, whole body) and whether individual differences in visual attention shape these experiences. We measured both the general tendency to notice SPS (SPSTrait) and in-the-moment awareness of them (SPSState), alongside performance on a visual Posner task of endogenous attention. SPSTrait was reported more strongly in the whole body compared to the feet, suggesting a broad, higher-order body representation. In contrast, SPSState did not vary by body part. These experiences, whether momentary that is, SPSState, or habitual that is, SPSTrait, were unrelated to how participants performed on the visual attention task. Our findings support a representational distinction: SPSTrait may reflect somatorepresentation, a top-down, global body model, whereas SPSState may arise from bottom-up somatosensation.
AckerleyR.CarlssonI.WesterH.OlaussonH.Backlund WaslingH. (2014). Touch perceptions across skin sites: Differences between sensitivity, direction discrimination and pleasantness. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 8(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2014.00054
2.
AspellJ. E.LenggenhagerB.BlankeO. (2009). Keeping in touch with one’s self: Multisensory mechanisms of self-consciousness. PloS one, 4(8), e6488. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0006488
3.
BeaudoinR.MichaelG. A. (2014). Gating of spontaneous somatic sensations by movement. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 31(3), 111–121. https://doi.org/10.3109/08990220.2014.888992
4.
BauerC. C. C.BarriosF. A.DíazJ.-L. (2014). Subjective somatosensory experiences disclosed by focused attention: Cortical-hippocampal-insular and amygdala contributions. PLoS One, 9(8), e104721. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0104721
5.
BauerC. C. C.DíazJ.-L.ConchaL.BarriosF. A. (2014). Sustained attention to spontaneous thumb sensations activates brain somatosensory and other proprioceptive districts. Brain and Cognition, 87, 86–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2014.03.009
6.
BergerA.HenikA.RafalR. (2005). Competition between endogenous and exogenous orienting of visual attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134(2), 207–221. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.134.2.207
7.
BorgC.EmondF. C.ColsonD.LaurentB.MichaelG. A. (2015). Attentional focus on subjective interoceptive experience in patients with fibromyalgia. Brain and Cognition, 101, 35–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2015.10.002
8.
BruggerP.KolliasS. S.MüriR. M.CrelierG.Hepp-ReymondM. C.RegardM. (2000). Beyond re-membering: Phantom sensations of congenitally absent limbs. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 97(11), 6167–6172. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.100510697
9.
BrusaF.KretzschmarL.MagnaniF. G.TurnerG.GarraffaM.SeddaA. (2021). Talking with hands: Body representation in British Sign Language users. Experimental Brain Research, 239(3), 731–744. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-020-06013-4
10.
BucknerR. L.Andrews-HannaJ. R.SchacterD. L. (2008). The brain’s default network: Anatomy, function, and relevance to disease. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1124, 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1196/annals.1440.011
11.
CaggianoP.CocchiniG. (2020). The functional body: Does body representation reflect functional properties?Experimental Brain Research, 238(1), 153–169. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-019-05705-w
12.
CameronJ. J.StinsonD. A. (2019). Gender (mis)measurement: Guidelines for respecting gender diversity in psychological research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13(11), Article e12506. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12506
13.
CardiniF.LongoM. R.HaggardP. (2011). Vision of the body modulates somatosensory intracortical inhibition. Cerebral Cortex (New York, N.Y.: 1991), 21(9), 2014–2022. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhq267
ChicaA. B.Martín-ArévaloE.BottaF.LupiáñezJ. (2014). The Spatial Orienting paradigm: How to design and interpret spatial attention experiments. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 40, 35–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.01.002
16.
CoelloY.CartaudA. (2021). The interrelation between peripersonal action space and interpersonal social space: Psychophysiological evidence and clinical implications. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, 636124. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2021.636124
17.
CorenS. (1993). The lateral preference inventory for measurement of handedness, footedness, eyedness, and earedness: Norms for young adults. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 31(1), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03334122
18.
CorreaÁ.LupiáñezJ.MillikenB.TudelaP. (2004). Endogenous temporal orienting of attention in detection and discrimination tasks. Perception and Psychophysics, 66(2), 264–278. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03194878
19.
CreaS.D’AlonzoM.VitielloN.CiprianiC. (2015). The rubber foot illusion. Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation, 12(1), 77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12984-015-0069-6
20.
De GelderB.BertelsonP. (2003). Multisensory integration, perception and ecological validity. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(10), 460–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.08.014
21.
Di LerniaD.SerinoS.RivaG. (2016). Pain in the body. Altered interoception in chronic pain conditions: A systematic review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 71, 328–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.09.015
22.
DijkermanH. C.de HaanE. H. F. (2007). Somatosensory processes subserving perception and action. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 30(2), 189–201. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X07001392
23.
DoricchiF.MacCiE.SilvettiM.MacAlusoE. (2010). Neural correlates of the spatial and expectancy components of endogenous and stimulus-driven orienting of attention in the posner task. Cerebral Cortex, 20(7), 1574–1585. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp215
24.
EfstathiouM.DelicatoL. S.SeddaA. (2022). Normal or tingly? A story about hands and feet. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 39(1), 46–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/08990220.2021.1993440
FaulF.ErdfelderE.BuchnerA.LangA. G. (2009). Statistical power analyses using G*Power 3.1: Tests for correlation and regression analyses. Behavior Research Methods, 41(4), 1149–1160. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149
27.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193146
28.
FerentziE.BogdányT.SzabolcsZ.CsalaB.HorváthÁ.KötelesF. (2018). Multichannel investigation of interoception: Sensitivity is not a generalizable feature. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 12, 223. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00223
29.
FieldA. (2013). Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
30.
FilingeriD.ZhangH.ArensE. A. (2018). Thermosensory micromapping of warm and cold sensitivity across glabrous and hairy skin of male and female hands and feet. Journal of Applied Physiology, 125(3), 723–736. https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00158.2018
31.
FlögelM.KalveramK. T.ChristO.VogtJ. (2016). Application of the rubber hand illusion paradigm: Comparison between upper and lower limbs. Psychological Research, 80, 298–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-015-0650-4
32.
FoxM. D.SnyderA. Z.VincentJ. L.CorbettaM.Van EssenD. C.RaichleM. E. (2005). The human brain is intrinsically organized into dynamic, anticorrelated functional networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(27), 9673–9678. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0504136102
33.
GallagherM.ColziC.SeddaA. (2021). Dissociation of proprioceptive drift and feelings of ownership in the somatic rubber hand illusion. Acta Psychologica, 212, 103192. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103192
GaoM.LimS.ChubykinA. A. (2021). Visual familiarity induced 5-Hz oscillations and improved orientation and direction selectivities in V1. The Journal of Neuroscience, 41(12), 2656–2667. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1337-20.2021
36.
GherriE.XuA.AmbronE.SeddaA. (2022). Peripersonal space around the upper and the lower limbs. Experimental Brain Research, 240(7–8), 2039–2050. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-022-06387-7
37.
GreenwaldA. G.McGheeD. E.SchwartzJ. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.
38.
GrossiD.LongarzoM.QuarantelliM.SalvatoreE.CavaliereC.De LucaP.TrojanoL.AielloM. (2017). Altered functional connectivity of interoception in illness anxiety disorder. Cortex, 86, 22–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2016.10.018
39.
Higgins-ChenA. T.AbdallahS. B.DwyerJ. B.KayeA. P.AngaritaG. A.BlochM. H. (2019). Severe illness anxiety treated by integrating inpatient psychotherapy with medical care and minimizing reassurance. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 150. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00150
40.
JohanssonR. S.VallboA. B. (1979). Tactile sensibility in the human hand: Relative and absolute densities of four types of mechanoreceptive units in glabrous skin. The Journal of Physiology, 286(1), 283–300. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1979.sp012619
41.
JongenE. M. M.SmuldersF. T. Y. (2007). Sequence effects in a spatial cueing task: Endogenous orienting is sensitive to orienting in the preceding trial. Psychological Research, 71(5), 516–523. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-006-0065-3
KingmaB.FrijnsA.van Marken LichtenbeltW. (2012). The thermoneutral zone: Implications for metabolic studies. Frontiers in Bioscience (Elite Edition), 4(5), 1975–1985. https://doi.org/10.2741/e518
45.
LenggenhagerB.BuschC.BruggerP. (2016). Minding gaps on the skin: Opposite bisection biases on forehead and back of one’s head. Consciousness and Cognition, 42, 9–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2016.03.001
46.
LongoM. R. (2016). Types of body representation. In CoelloY.FischerM. H. (Eds.), Foundations of embodied cognition: Perceptual and emotional embodiment (pp. 117–134). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
ManciniF.BauleoA.ColeJ.LuiF.PorroC. A.HaggardP.IannettiG. D. (2014). Whole-body mapping of spatial acuity for pain and touch. Annals of Neurology, 75(6), 917–924. https://doi.org/10.1002/ana.24179
49.
MelzackR.IsraelR.LacroixR.SchultzG. (1997). Phantom limbs in people with congenital limb deficiency or amputation in early childhood. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 120(Pt 9), 1603–1620. https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/120.9.1603
50.
MichaelG. A.NaveteurJ. (2011). The tickly homunculus and the origins of spontaneous sensations arising on the hands. Consciousness and Cognition, 20(3), 603–617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2010.11.013
51.
MichaelG. A.DupuyM. A.DeleuzeA.HumblotM.SimonB.NaveteurJ. (2012). Interacting effects of vision and attention in perceiving spontaneous sensations arising on the hands. Experimental Brain Research, 216(1), 21–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-011-2901-y
52.
MichaelG. A.GuyotD.TarrouxE.ComteM.SalguesS. (2020). Feeling oneself requires embodiment: Insights from the relationship between own-body transformations, schizotypal personality traits, and spontaneous bodily sensations. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 578237. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.578237
53.
MichaelG. A.NaveteurJ.DupuyM.-A.JacquotL. (2015). My heart is in my hands: The interoceptive nature of the spontaneous sensations felt on the hands. Physiology & Behavior, 143, 113–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physbeh.2015.02.030
54.
MichaelG. A.SalguesS.PlancherG.DuranG. (2022). Cues to body-related distortions and hallucinations? Spontaneous sensations correlate with EEG oscillatory activity recorded at rest in the somatosensory cortices. Psychiatry Research. Neuroimaging, 324, 111506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscychresns.2022.111506
55.
MichaelG. A.TapieroI.Gálvez-GarcíaG.JacquotL. (2017). Thoughts and sensations, twin galaxies of the inner space: The propensity to mind-wander relates to spontaneous sensations arising on the hands. Consciousness and Cognition, 55, 223–231. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.concog.2017.08.007
MoraL.SeddaA.EstebanT.CocchiniG. (2021). The signing body: Extensive sign language practice shapes the size of hands and face. Experimental Brain Research, 239(7), 2233–2249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-021-06121-9
58.
MunnekeJ.HoppenbrouwersS. S.TheeuwesJ. (2015). Reward can modulate attentional capture, independent of top-down set. Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics, 77(8), 2540–2548. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-015-0958-6
59.
NaveteurJ.DupuyM. A.GabrielliF.MichaelG. A. (2015). How we perceive our own hands: Effects of attention, aging, and sex. Somatosensory and Motor Research, 32(4), 227–235. https://doi.org/10.3109/08990220.2015.1086326
60.
NaveteurJ.HonoreJ.MichaelG. (2005). How to detect an electrocutaneous shock which is not delivered?Overt spatial attention influences decision. Behavioural Brain Research, 165(2), 254–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2005.07.001
PaillardJ. (1999). Body schema and body image: A double dissociation in deafferentedpatients. In GantchevG. N.MoriS.MassionJ. (Eds.), Motor control,today and tomorrow (pp. 197–214).
63.
PenfieldW.RasmussenT. (1950). The Cerebral cortex of man: A clinical study of localization of function. Macmillan.
SalguesS.PlancherG.JacquotL.NaveteurJ.FanuelL.Gálvez-GarcíaG.MichaelG. A. (2021). To the self and beyond: Arousal and functional connectivity of the temporo-parietal junction contributes to spontaneous sensations perception. Behavioural Brain Research, 396, 112880. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbr.2020.112880
66.
SalguesS.PlancherG.MichaelG. A. (2021). Visuospatial working memory abilities and spontaneous sensations perception. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 38(3), 164–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/08990220.2021.1914018
67.
SalguesS.PlancherG.MichaelG. A. (2024). Is it really on your hand? Spontaneous sensations are not peripheral sensations – Evidence from able-bodied individuals and a phantom limb syndrome patient. Brain and Cognition, 175, 106138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandc.2024.106138
68.
SchwoebelJ.CoslettH. B. (2005). Evidence for multiple, distinct representations of the human body. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17(4), 543–553. https://doi.org/10.1162/0898929053467587
69.
SimhiN.YovelG. (2021). Independent contributions of the face, body, and gait to the representation of the whole person. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 83(1), 199–214. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-020-02110-2
70.
SpielbergerC. D.GorsuchR. L.LusheneR.VaggP. R.JacobsG. A. (1983). Manual for the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Consulting Psychologists Press.
71.
StevensC.ChooK. K. J. (1998). Temperature sensitivity of the body surface over the life span. Somatosensory & Motor Research, 15(1), 13–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/08990229870925
72.
StoetG. (2010). PsyToolkit: A software package for programming psychological experiments using Linux. Behavior Research Methods, 42(4), 1096–1104. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.4.1096
73.
StoetG. (2017). PsyToolkit: A novel web-based method for running online questionnaires and reaction-time experiments. Teaching of Psychology, 44(1), 24–31. https://doi.org/10.1177/0098628316677643
74.
SuiJ.LiuC. H.WangL.HanS. (2009). Attentional orientation induced by temporarily established self-referential cues. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(5), 844–849. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802559393
75.
World Medical Association. (2013). World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA, 310, 2191–2194.
76.
WyckelsmaV. L.VenckunasT.HouwelingP. J.SchlittlerM.LauschkeV. M.TiongC. F.WoodH. D.IvarssonN.PaulauskasH.EimantasN.AnderssonD. C.NorthK. N.BrazaitisM.WesterbladH. (2021). Loss of α-actinin-3 during human evolution provides superior cold resilience and muscle heat generation. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 108(3), 446–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.01.013
77.
ZacksJ.MiresJ.TverskyB.HazeltineE. (2002). Mental spatial transformation of objects and perspective. Spatial Cognition and Computation, 2, 315–332.
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.
