TY - JOUR
T1 - Proprioception
T2 - a different look at the same concept-Comment on Heroux et al
AU - Han, Jia
AU - Adams, Roger
AU - Yang, Nan
AU - Waddington, Gordon
N1 - Funding Information:
This work was supported by National Nature Science Foundation of China (Grant No.: 31870936), Program of Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality [Excellent academic leader (Youth) of Science and Technology Innovation Action Plan, Grant No.: 20XD1423200].
PY - 2022/9/1
Y1 - 2022/9/1
N2 - TO THE EDITOR: In their Perspective article, Heroux et al. (1) argue that detection, discrimination, and matching proprioceptive test methods are in a single frame of reference and thus low-level assessments, whereas high-level proprioception has multiple frames of reference. We reviewed the methods from a neuropsychophysical perspective (2) and classified them as “imposed” or “obtained” proprioception in our Letter to the Editor of Journal of Applied Physiology (3). One problem with Heroux et al.’s (1) “low-level/high-level” approach to proprioception and function is that to adequately test “low-level” proprioception, it is necessary to take normal function into account and consider ecological validity (2). To be valid, a test situation must look like real life, where “low-level” is also “high-level,” because few functional tasks are carried out blindfolded as “low-level” proprioception tests often are. Removing vision during testing is intended to make them “pure” tests of proprioception, but this can generate other problems.
AB - TO THE EDITOR: In their Perspective article, Heroux et al. (1) argue that detection, discrimination, and matching proprioceptive test methods are in a single frame of reference and thus low-level assessments, whereas high-level proprioception has multiple frames of reference. We reviewed the methods from a neuropsychophysical perspective (2) and classified them as “imposed” or “obtained” proprioception in our Letter to the Editor of Journal of Applied Physiology (3). One problem with Heroux et al.’s (1) “low-level/high-level” approach to proprioception and function is that to adequately test “low-level” proprioception, it is necessary to take normal function into account and consider ecological validity (2). To be valid, a test situation must look like real life, where “low-level” is also “high-level,” because few functional tasks are carried out blindfolded as “low-level” proprioception tests often are. Removing vision during testing is intended to make them “pure” tests of proprioception, but this can generate other problems.
KW - perception
KW - proprioception
KW - sensorimotor
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85136955874&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1152/japplphysiol.00330.2022
DO - 10.1152/japplphysiol.00330.2022
M3 - Letter
C2 - 36041480
AN - SCOPUS:85136955874
SN - 1522-1601
VL - 133
SP - 606
EP - 607
JO - Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985)
JF - Journal of applied physiology (Bethesda, Md. : 1985)
IS - 3
ER -