%0 Journal Article
%T High Action Values Occur Near Our Body
%J -
%D 2019
%R https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.01.001
%X In a recent Opinion article Bufacchi and Iannetti (2018) [ 1 Bufacchi R. Iannetti G. An action field theory of peripersonal space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2018; 22 : 1076-1090 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar ] claim that peripersonal space (PPS) ¨C the space immediately adjacent to one¡¯s body ¨C is widely considered to be ¡®a single entity, with binary in-or-out boundary, and mostly dependent on stimulus proximity to the body¡¯. In counterpoint, the authors argue that PPS should not be conceived as an area of space demarked by a strong boundary but instead as ¡®fields¡¯ computing ¡®contact-related behavioral relevance¡¯ [ 1 Bufacchi R. Iannetti G. An action field theory of peripersonal space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 2018; 22 : 1076-1090 Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (0) Google Scholar ]. They argue that this conceptualization (i) allows PPS measures to change gradually with distance, (ii) reflects the fact that there are many different PPS measures showing different response profiles, and (iii) explains the functional significance of the values composing PPS. Regarding this last point, they suggest that '[t]here is no reason to think that ¡­ stimulus proximity is more important to PPS measures than any of the other factors they are sensitive to'. We fully agree with (i) and (ii); PPS should be conceived as a gradient and as plurality of representations [ 2 Serino A. et al. Body part-centered and full body-centered peripersonal space representations. Sci. Rep. 2015; 5 18603 Crossref PubMed Google Scholar ]. Contrarily, we argue that, although PPS can be conceived as a ¡®value field¡¯, and this definition indeed allows disparate neural networks (e.g., reward systems) to interact with the PPS network, ¡®value¡¯ for PPS neurons is nevertheless defined by proximity to the body and is encoded by a specific population of multisensory neurons
%U https://www.cell.com/trends/cognitive-sciences/fulltext/S1364-6613(19)30015-4