Abstract
A crucial aspect of interacting with objects in our environment lies in determining whether they are located within peripersonal space (PPS) - where immediate action is possible- or extrapersonal space (EPS), where objects are out of reach. Importantly, social context often prompts additional consideration of object ownership, which may interfere with spatial localization. Although previous research has demonstrated that both spatial and social contexts influence object processing, the neural networks subtending their interaction remains largely unexplored. To address this issue, the present fMRI study investigated the neural correlates of object ownership as a function of spatial location (PPS vs EPS). While facing a virtual character, 22 participants judged the reachability of self-owned or other-owned objects placed at varying distances. Results showed that objects located in the PPS activated parietal regions implicated in the sensorimotor coding of near-space stimuli, with enhanced parietal responses observed for self-owned objects, particularly in the right hemisphere. Conversely, objects in EPS engaged prefrontal regions, especially when they were self-owned. Multivariate analyses further revealed that both the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (dmPFC) reliably distinguished self-owned objects, with the vmPFC selectively encoding self-ownership in the PPS. These findings highlight how spatial and social dimensions jointly shape object representations in the brain, with self-relevance modulating action-related processing even in tasks focusing on spatial processing.
Data availability
The datasets analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to data protection regulations and the nature of participants’ informed consent, but can be made available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Brozzoli, C., Makin, T. R., Cardinali, L., Holmes, N. P. & Farnè, A. Peripersonal space: A multisensory interface for body–object interactions. In The Neural Bases of Multisensory Processes (eds Murray, M. M. & Wallace, M. T.) (CRC Press, 2011).
Serino, A. Peripersonal space (PPS) as a multisensory interface between the individual and the environment, defining the space of the self. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 99, 138–159 (2019).
Bufacchi, R. J. & Iannetti, G. D. An action field theory of peripersonal space. Trends Cogn. Sci. 22, 1076–1090 (2018).
Cardinali, L. et al. Tool-use induces morphological updating of the body schema. Curr. Biol. 19, R478–R479 (2009).
Cardinali, L. et al. When action is not enough: tool-use reveals tactile-dependent access to body schema. Neuropsychologia 49, 3750–3757 (2011).
Farnè, A. & Làdavas, E. Dynamic size-change of hand peripersonal space following tool use. NeuroReport 11, 1645–1649 (2000).
Iriki, A., Tanaka, M. & Iwamura, Y. Coding of modified body schema during tool use by macaque postcentral neurones. NeuroReport 7, 2325–2330 (1996).
Canzoneri, E. et al. Tool-use reshapes the boundaries of body and peripersonal space representations. Exp. Brain Res. 228, 25–42 (2013).
Toussaint, L., Wamain, Y., Bidet-Ildei, C. & Coello, Y. Short-term upper-limb immobilization alters peripersonal space representation. Psychol. Res. 84, 907–914 (2020).
Coello, Y. & Cartaud, A. The interrelation between peripersonal action space and interpersonal social space: Psychophysiological evidence and clinical implications. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 15, 636124 (2021).
Di Pellegrino, G. & Làdavas, E. Peripersonal space in the brain. Neuropsychologia 66, 126–133 (2015).
Basile, G. A. et al. Neuroanatomical correlates of peripersonal space: bridging perception, action, emotion and social cognition. Brain Struct. Funct. 229, 1047–1072 (2024).
Cléry, J., Guipponi, O., Wardak, C. & Hamed, S. B. Neuronal bases of peripersonal and extrapersonal spaces, their plasticity and dynamics: Knowns and unknowns. Neuropsychologia 70, 313–326 (2015).
Grivaz, P., Blanke, O. & Serino, A. Common and distinct brain regions processing multisensory bodily signals for peripersonal space and body ownership. Neuroimage 147, 602–618 (2017).
Graziano, M. S. & Gross, C. G. A bimodal map of space: Somatosensory receptive fields in the macaque putamen with corresponding visual receptive fields. Exp. Brain Res. 97, 96–109 (1993).
Fogassi, L. et al. Coding of peripersonal space in inferior premotor cortex (area F4). J. Neurophysiol. 76, 141–157 (1996).
Rizzolatti, G., Scandolara, C., Matelli, M. & Gentilucci, M. Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys II: Visual responses. Behav. Brain Res. 2, 147–163 (1981).
Sereno, M. I. & Huang, R. S. A human parietal face area contains aligned head-centered visual and tactile maps. Nat. Neurosci. 9, 1337–1343 (2006).
Brozzoli, C., Gentile, G. & Ehrsson, H. H. That’s near my hand! Parietal and premotor coding of hand-centered space contributes to localization and self-attribution of the hand. J. Neurosci. 32, 14573–14582 (2012).
Gigliotti, M. F., Soares Coelho, P., Coutinho, J. & Coello, Y. Peripersonal space in social context is modulated by action reward, but differently in males and females. Psychol. Res. 85, 181–194 (2021).
Teneggi, C., Canzoneri, E., di Pellegrino, G. & Serino, A. Social modulation of peripersonal space boundaries. Curr. Biol. 23, 406–411 (2013).
Cardellicchio, P., Sinigaglia, C. & Costantini, M. Grasping affordances with the other’s hand: A TMS study. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 8, 455–459 (2013).
Iachini, T. & Ruggiero, G. Can I put myself in your shoes? Sharing peripersonal space reveals the simulation of the action possibilities of others. Exp. Brain Res. 239, 1035–1045 (2021).
Brozzoli, C., Gentile, G., Bergouignan, L. & Ehrsson, H. H. A shared representation of the space near oneself and others in the human premotor cortex. Curr. Biol. 23, 1764–1768 (2013).
Schaefer, M., Heinze, H. J. & Rotte, M. Close to you: Embodied simulation for peripersonal space in primary somatosensory cortex. PLoS ONE 7, e42308 (2012).
Rizzolatti, G. & Rozzi, S. The mirror mechanism in the parietal lobe. Handb. Clin. Neurol. 151, 555–573 (2018).
Constable, M. D., Kritikos, A. & Bayliss, A. P. Grasping the concept of personal property. Cognition 119, 430–437 (2011).
Constable, M. D., Kritikos, A., Lipp, O. V. & Bayliss, A. P. Object ownership and action: the influence of social context and choice on the manipulation of personal property. Exp. Brain Res. 232, 3749–3761 (2014).
Lenglart, L., Roger, C., Sampaio, A. & Coello, Y. The role of object ownership on online inhibition in peripersonal space. Psychophysiology 61, e14659 (2024).
Lenglart, L., Roger, C., Sampaio, A. & Coello, Y. Object ownership processing in peripersonal space: An EEG study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. (2025).
Fujii, N., Hihara, S. & Iriki, A. Dynamic social adaptation of motion-related neurons in primate parietal cortex. PLoS ONE 2, e397 (2007).
Cunningham, S. J. & Turk, D. J. A review of self-processing biases in cognition. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 70, 987–995 (2017).
Kelley, W. M. et al. Finding the self? An event-related fMRI study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 14, 785–794 (2002).
Murphy, C. et al. A re-examination of the role of the DMN in social and self-relevant off-task thought. PLoS ONE 14, e0216182 (2019).
Sui, J. & Gu, X. Self as object: emerging trends in self research. Trends Neurosci. 40, 643–654 (2017).
Tacikowski, P. et al. Is it about the self or the significance? An fMRI study of self-name recognition. Soc. Neurosci. 6, 98–107 (2011).
Turk, D. J., Van Bussel, K., Waiter, G. D. & Macrae, C. N. Mine and me: exploring the neural basis of object ownership. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 3657–3668 (2011).
Kim, K. & Johnson, M. K. Extended self: medial prefrontal activity during transient association of self and objects. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 7, 199–207 (2012).
Belk, R. W. Possessions and the extended self. J. Consum. Res. 15, 139–168 (1988).
Beggan, J. K. On the social nature of nonsocial perception: the mere ownership effect. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 62, 229–237 (1992).
Parelman, J. M. et al. Overlapping functional representations of self- and other-related thought revealed via MVPA. Cereb. Cortex 32, 1131–1141 (2022).
Golubickis, M. & Macrae, C. N. Self-prioritization reconsidered: Scrutinizing three claims. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 18, 876–886 (2023).
Falbén, J. K. et al. How prioritized is self-prioritization during stimulus processing?. Vis. Cogn. 27, 46–51 (2019).
Clarkson, T. R. et al. Is self always prioritised? Attenuating the ownership self-reference effect in memory. Conscious. Cogn. 106, 103420 (2022).
Caughey, S. et al. Self-prioritization during stimulus processing is not obligatory. Psychol. Res. 85, 503–508 (2021).
Falbén, J. K. et al. The effects of prior beliefs and stimulus prevalence on self–other prioritisation. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 73, 1466–1480 (2020).
Patané, I., Brozzoli, C., Koun, E., Frassinetti, F. & Farnè, A. Me, you, and our object: peripersonal space recruitment during executed and observed actions depends on object ownership. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 150, 1410–1423 (2021).
Woo, C.-W., Krishnan, A. & Wager, T. D. Cluster-extent based thresholding in fMRI analyses: pitfalls and recommendations. Neuroimage 91, 412–417 (2014).
Bartolo, A. et al. Contribution of the motor system to the perception of reachable space: an fMRI study. Eur. J. Neurosci. 40, 3807–3817 (2014).
Rizzolatti, G., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L. & Gallese, V. The space around us. Science 277, 190–191 (1997).
Caspers, S. et al. ALE meta-analysis of action observation and imitation in the human brain. Neuroimage 50, 1148–1167 (2010).
Peeters, R. et al. The representation of tool use in humans and monkeys. J. Neurosci. 29, 11523–11539 (2009).
Van Overwalle, F. & Baetens, K. Understanding others’ actions and goals by mirror and mentalizing systems: a meta-analysis. Neuroimage 48, 564–584 (2009).
Blanke, O., Ionta, S., Fornari, E., Mohr, C. & Maeder, P. Mental imagery for full and upper human bodies: Common right hemisphere activations and distinct extrastriate activations. Brain Topogr. 23, 321–332 (2010).
Daprati, E., Sirigu, A. & Nico, D. Body and movement: consciousness in the parietal lobes. Neuropsychologia 48, 756–762 (2010).
Harris, I. M. et al. Selective right parietal lobe activation during mental rotation. Brain 123, 65–73 (2000).
Longo, M. R., Trippier, S., Vagnoni, E. & Lourenco, S. F. Right hemisphere control of visuospatial attention in near space. Neuropsychologia 70, 350–357 (2015).
Schintu, S. et al. Object and space perception—Is it a matter of hemisphere?. Cortex 57, 244–253 (2014).
Spitoni, G. F. et al. Right but not left angular gyrus modulates metric aspects of mental body representation. Exp. Brain Res. 228, 63–72 (2013).
Lieberman, M. D. & Cunningham, W. A. Type I and Type II error concerns in fMRI research: re-balancing the scale. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 4, 423–428 (2009).
Derrfuss, J., Brass, M. & von Cramon, D. Y. Cognitive control in the posterior frontolateral cortex. Neuroimage 23, 604–612 (2004).
Miller, E. K. & Cohen, J. D. An integrative theory of prefrontal cortex function. Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 24, 167–202 (2001).
Geers, L. et al. Role of the fronto-parietal cortex in prospective action judgments. Sci. Rep. 11, 7454 (2021).
Rämä, P., Sala, J. B., Gillen, J. S., Pekar, J. J. & Courtney, S. M. Dissociation of neural systems for working-memory maintenance of verbal and nonspatial visual information. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 1, 161–173 (2001).
Takahashi, E., Ohki, K. & Kim, D. S. Dissociation and convergence of dorsal and ventral visual working memory streams in human prefrontal cortex. Neuroimage 65, 488–498 (2013).
Aron, A. R. & Poldrack, R. A. Cortical and subcortical contributions to stop-signal response inhibition. J. Neurosci. 26, 2424–2433 (2006).
Schaum, M. et al. Right inferior frontal gyrus implements motor inhibitory control via beta-band oscillations. eLife 10, e61679 (2021).
Aron, A. R., Robbins, T. W. & Poldrack, R. A. Inhibition and the right inferior frontal cortex: One decade on. Trends Cogn. Sci. 18, 177–185 (2014).
Nachev, P. et al. The role of the pre-SMA in the control of action. Neuroimage 36, T155–T168 (2007).
Obeso, I. et al. Stimulation of the pre-SMA influences cerebral blood flow in frontal areas involved in inhibitory control. Brain Stimul. 6, 769–776 (2013).
Sharp, D. J. et al. Distinct frontal systems for response inhibition, attentional capture and error processing. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 6106–6111 (2010).
Battaglia, S., Nazzi, C., Di Fazio, C. & Borgomaneri, S. The role of pre-supplementary motor cortex in action control with emotional stimuli: a repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation study. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1536, 151–166 (2024).
Duque, J., Olivier, E. & Rushworth, M. Top–down inhibitory control exerted by the medial frontal cortex during action selection under conflict. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 25, 1634–1648 (2013).
Lynn, M. T., Demanet, J., Krebs, R. M., Van Dessel, P. & Brass, M. Voluntary inhibition of pain avoidance behavior: an fMRI study. Brain Struct. Funct. 221, 1309–1320 (2016).
Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L. & Rizzolatti, G. Action representation and the inferior parietal lobule. In Cognitive Neuroscience of Action 451–461 (2002).
Bzdok, D. et al. Segregation of the human medial prefrontal cortex in social cognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 232 (2013).
de la Vega, A., Chang, L. J., Banich, M. T., Wager, T. D. & Yarkoni, T. Large-scale meta-analysis of human medial frontal cortex reveals tripartite functional organization. J. Neurosci. 36, 6553–6562 (2016).
Grossmann, T. The role of medial prefrontal cortex in early social cognition. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 7, 340 (2013).
Lieberman, M. D., Straccia, M. A., Meyer, M. L., Du, M. & Tan, K. M. Social, self (situational), and affective processes in medial prefrontal cortex: causal, multivariate, and reverse inference evidence. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 99, 311–328 (2019).
Vincent, J. L., Kahn, I., Snyder, A. Z., Raichle, M. E. & Buckner, R. L. Evidence for a frontoparietal control system revealed by intrinsic functional connectivity. J. Neurophysiol. 100, 3328–3342 (2008).
Fornito, A., Harrison, B. J., Zalesky, A. & Simons, J. S. Competitive and cooperative dynamics of large-scale brain functional networks supporting recollection. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 12788–12793 (2012).
Isik, L., Koldewyn, K., Beeler, D. & Kanwisher, N. Perceiving social interactions in the posterior superior temporal sulcus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 114, E9145–E9152 (2017).
Walbrin, J., Downing, P. & Koldewyn, K. Neural responses to visually observed social interactions. Neuropsychologia 112, 31–39 (2018).
Enrici, I., Adenzato, M., Cappa, S., Bara, B. G. & Tettamanti, M. Intention processing in communication: a common brain network for language and gestures. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 23, 2415–2431 (2011).
Frith, U. & Frith, C. D. Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 358, 459–473 (2003).
Gallagher, H. L. et al. Reading the mind in cartoons and stories: an fMRI study of theory of mind in verbal and nonverbal tasks. Neuropsychologia 38, 11–21 (2000).
Gallagher, H. L. & Frith, C. D. Dissociable neural pathways for the perception and recognition of expressive and instrumental gestures. Neuropsychologia 42, 1725–1736 (2004).
Stehr, D. A. et al. Top-down attention guidance shapes action encoding in the pSTS. Cereb. Cortex 31, 3522–3535 (2021).
Zhao, M., Li, R., Xiang, S. & Liu, N. Two different mirror neuron pathways for social and non-social actions? A meta-analysis of fMRI studies. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 19, nsae068 (2024).
Dumas, G., Moreau, Q., Tognoli, E. & Kelso, J. S. The human dynamic clamp reveals the fronto-parietal network linking real-time social coordination and cognition. Cereb. Cortex 30, 3271–3287 (2020).
Preston, C. & Newport, R. Misattribution of movement agency following right parietal TMS. Soc. Cogn. Affect. Neurosci. 3, 26–32 (2008).
Schäfer, S. & Frings, C. Understanding self-prioritisation: the prioritisation of self-relevant stimuli and its relation to individual self-esteem. J. Cogn. Psychol. 31, 813–824 (2019).
Katsumi, A., Iwata, S. & Tsukiura, T. Roles of the default mode network in different aspects of self-representation when remembering social autobiographical memories. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 36, 1021–1036 (2024).
Murray, R. J., Schaer, M. & Debbané, M. Degrees of separation: a quantitative neuroimaging meta-analysis. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 36, 1043–1059 (2012).
D’Argembeau, A. et al. Distinct regions of the medial prefrontal cortex are associated with self-referential processing and perspective taking. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 935–944 (2007).
Pfeifer, J. H., Lieberman, M. D. & Dapretto, M. I know you are but what am I?!”: Neural bases of self- and social-knowledge retrieval in children and adults. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 19, 1323–1337 (2007).
Piva, M., Velnoskey, K., Jia, R., Nair, A., Levy, I. & Chang, S. W. The dorsomedial prefrontal cortex computes task-invariant relative subjective value for self and other. eLife 8, e44939 (2019).
Wittmann, M. K. et al. Causal manipulation of self–other mergence in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. Neuron 109, 2353–2361 (2021).
Lenglart, L., Cartaud, A., Quesque, F., Sampaio, A. & Coello, Y. Object coding in peripersonal space depends on object ownership. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 76, 1925–1939 (2023).
Su, Z. et al. Dorsomedial and ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions differentially impact social influence and temporal discounting. PLoS Biol. 23, e3003079 (2025).
Friston, K. Prediction, perception and agency. Int. J. Psychophysiol. 83, 248–252 (2012).
Soares, J. M. et al. A hitchhiker’s guide to functional magnetic resonance imaging. Front. Neurosci. 10, 515 (2016).
Thirion, B. et al. Analysis of a large fMRI cohort: statistical and methodological issues for group analyses. Neuroimage 35, 105–120 (2007).
Wamain, Y., Gabrielli, F. & Coello, Y. EEG μ rhythm in virtual reality reveals that motor coding of visual objects in peripersonal space is task-dependent. Cortex 74, 20–30 (2016).
Cartaud, A. & Coello, Y. ATHOS: a database of 48 3D human virtual characters with non-emotional facial expressions for virtual reality. HAL archives (hal-04137382) (2023).
Esteban, O. et al. fMRIPrep: a robust preprocessing pipeline for functional MRI. Nat. Methods. 16, 111–116 (2019).
Gorgolewski, K. et al. Nipype: a flexible, lightweight and extensible neuroimaging data processing framework in Python. Front. Neuroinform. 5, 13 (2011).
Ciric, R. et al. Benchmarking of participant-level confound regression strategies for the control of motion artifact in studies of functional connectivity. Neuroimage 154, 174–187 (2017).
Satterthwaite, T. D. et al. Heterogeneous impact of motion on fundamental patterns of developmental changes in functional connectivity during youth. Neuroimage 83, 45–57 (2013).
Genovese, C. R., Lazar, N. A. & Nichols, T. Thresholding statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovesry rate. Neuroimage 15, 870–878 (2002).
Kilner, J. M., Friston, K. J. & Frith, C. D. Predictive coding: an account of the mirror neuron system. Cogn. Process. 8, 159–166 (2007).
Rizzolatti, G. & Sinigaglia, C. The functional role of the parieto-frontal mirror circuit: Interpretations and misinterpretations. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 11, 264–274 (2010).
Rolls, E. T., Huang, C. C., Lin, C. P., Feng, J. & Joliot, M. Automated anatomical labeling atlas 3. Neuroimage 206, 116189 (2020).
Eickhoff, S. B. et al. A new SPM toolbox for combining probabilistic cytoarchitectonic maps and functional imaging data. Neuroimage 25, 1325–1335 (2005).
Hebart, M. N., Görgen, K. & Haynes, J. D. The Decoding Toolbox (TDT): A versatile software package for multivariate analyses of functional imaging data. Front. Neuroinform. 8, 88 (2015).
Martínez-Pérez, V., Campoy, G., Palmero, L. B. & Fuentes, L. J. Examining the dorsolateral and ventromedial prefrontal cortex involvement in the self-attention network: a randomized, sham-controlled multichannel HD-tDCS study. Front. Neurosci. 14, 683 (2020).
Acknowledgements
This research was supported by the Research Federation FR CNRS 2052 Visual Sciences and Cultures, by the Associated International Laboratory ESTRA and UMR CNRS SCALab of the University of Lille. Part of the experimental work was conducted at CIPsi, School of Psychology, University of Minho. The authors gratefully acknowledge Hugo Couto for his contribution to data collection.
Funding
This research was supported by the Investments for the Future Program (PIA) of the French Government, managed by the National Research Agency (ANR) under grant ANR-21-ESRE-0030 (Continuum). Additional funding was provided by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) through the Portuguese State Budget under grant UID/01662/2020. L.L. received PhD funding from the Hauts-de-France Region and the Graduate Program Information and Knowledge Society at the University of Lille.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
L.L. contributed to conceptualization; methodology; software; data curation; formal analysis; visualization; writing original draft. A.S. contributed to conceptualization; methodology; supervision; project administration; formal analysis; visualization; writing original draft. Y.C. contributed to conceptualization; funding acquisition; methodology; project administration; supervision; visualization; writing original draft.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Lenglart, L., Coello, Y. & Sampaio, A. The contextual self: object ownership modulates neural encoding across peripersonal and extrapersonal spaces. Sci Rep (2026). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44438-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-44438-z
