2026-10-12T09:27:14Z https://api.figshare.com/v2/oai

oai:figshare.com:article/34026664 2026-09-29T17:37:02Z category_15 category_16 category_21 category_39 category_45 category_734 category_811 category_122 category_132 portal_5 item_type_1 month_year_09_2026

<p>Differences in localization error across participants.</p> Hüseyin O. Elmas (25138381) W. Pieter Medendorp (9536749) Luke E. Miller (25138384) Neuroscience Physiology Biotechnology Ecology Sociology Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified Mathematical Sciences not elsewhere classified Mental Health Infectious Diseases specified via proprioception identical prior expectations distinct computational mechanisms touch merely cues body whose position several bayesian models integration hypothesis </ div >< p cueing hypothesis </ proprioceptive localization rely proprioceptive localization integrating touch body ’ bayesian perspective bayesian computations spatial coordinates present study posture information mosquito ’ mosquito lands modalities provided important implications first formalized external space everyday behaviors away requires 3d posture <p>A) Magnitude differences and B) angular distances between tactile and proprioceptive localization errors for individual participants. Angular distance represents the absolute circular difference between mean tactile and proprioceptive error directions for each participant. Red dots indicate significant differences (p < 0.05), gray dots indicate non-significant differences. Box plots show the distribution across all participants.</p> 2026-09-29T17:36:56Z Image Figure 10.1371/journal.pone.0358656.g004 https://figshare.com/articles/figure/_p_Differences_in_localization_error_across_participants_p_/34026664 CC BY 4.0