The concept of “kinesthetic spatial cognition” (analogous to the psychological concept of “visual spatial cognition”) is developed here to define an overall realm in cognitive and motor control studies according to which the choreutic conception can be reevaluated.

In Section IIA. kinesthesia is identified as arising from sensory stimulations via receptors in muscles, tendons, joints, skin, vestibular apparatus, eyes, ears, and also from an interior knowledge of motor commands (efferent data). This assortment of stimulations from throughout the body are derived into perceptions of balance and equilibrium, self-motion, limb–motion, limb position, and force or exertion.

In Section IIB. “kinesthetic space” is defined as spatial information which is perceived and/or recalled through the kinesthetic perceptual-motor system. A multitude of types of environmental, bodily, and conceptual “spaces” are considered and concepts such as kinesthetic-motor space, work space, reach space, and movement space are seen as relatively synonymous with Laban’s (1966) concept of the “kinesphere”; referring to the space within immediate reach of body movements.

In Section IIC. “kinesthetic spatial cognition” is defined as cognitive processes (eg. perception, imagery, mental manipulations) which are performed on kinesthetic spatial information. Support for this concept is built-up from psychological theory. A great deal of research has distinguished spatial cognition from verbal cognition as using separate cognitive resources. Spatial information can arise from separate visual, audio, and kinesthetic perceptual-motor systems but is eventually represented in a unitary spatial memory system. Kinesthetic-motor knowledge is considered by many researchers to inherently require cognitive processing rather than consisting solely of sensory-motor responding. Kinesthetic-motor activity has long been identified as being at the basis of all spatial learning and is hypothesised to function as a spatial rehearsal mechanism (eg. eye movements). Many theorists also purport that kinesthetic-motor information is at the basis of all types of cognitive processes (including verbal). This concept of “kinesthetic spatial cognition” has not been heretofore explicitly developed in cognitive psychology and so constitutes new knowledge. This provides a cognitive and motor control context in which to reevaluate choreutics.

The terminology and functioning of the kinesthetic perceptual-motor system is briefly outlined here. For details, see Appendix II.

IIA.11 Variety of Terms.
A variety of terms, including kinesthesia, proprioception, somaesthesia, the haptic system, position sense, muscle sense, joint sense, and movement sense, have all been used in similar ways to describe aspects of the perception of bodily movements and positions.
The sense of movement and position of one’s own body does not easily fit into Aristotle’s classic five senses; seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching. Consequently Sir Charles Bell (1833) and others more recently (Fitt 1988, p. 266) use the notion of a “sixth sense”. Dickinson (1974, p. 9) describes how this sixth sense conception is based on a “doctrine of ‘specific nerve energies’” whereby a particular sense is thought to emerge from a particular sensory receptor. However, this has been shown to not hold true for vision and audition which both utilise sensory data from head/body movements in the perceptual process (Scharf and Houtsma, 1986; Sedgwick, 1986) and is especially true for kinesthesia which arises from receptors throughout the body. Thus, kinesthesia is not a new “sixth sense” but refers to perceptions which arise from many different sensory receptors located throughout the body.

Kinesthesia can be considered to be a generalised version of the sense of touch. Rock and Harris (1967, p. 96) use “touch in this broad definition” to refer to the sense of body movement and position. Similarly, the notion of the “haptic system” (from Greek haptein, to touch; Collins, 1986) is sometimes used very similar to kinesthesia with its “mode of attention” as “touching” and which the “hands and other body members” are considered to be the “organs of perception” (Gibson, 1966, pp. 50–53). Bastian (1888) originally proposed the term “kinesthesis” to replace both the terms “muscular sense” and “sense of force”, and also noted that its “cerebral seat or area corresponds with the sense of touch” (p. 5).

Bastian (1888) included the perception of “position and movements of our limbs” and “different degrees of ‘resistance’ and ‘weight’” within the heading of “kinesthesis”. Some authors distinguish between kinesthesia as the sense of movement rather than the sense of static position since illusions can be experimentally induced in which these two “senses” do not correspond (Cross and McCloskey, 1973; McCloskey, 1973). However, in common usage “kinesthesia” refers to perceptions of movement, position, and force (American, 1982; Collins, 1986; Clark and Horch, 1986; English and English, 1974; Fitt, 1988; Rasch and Burke, 1978, p. 80).

Sherrington (1906) originated the term “proprioception” to refer to sensory receptors which are within “a cellular bulk more or less screened from the environment” (p. 316) and so “the stimuli to the receptors are given by the organism itself” (p. 130). In contrast “exteroceptors” refer to sensory cells which are “freely open to the numberless vicissitudes and agencies of the environment” (p. 317) and “interoceptors” refer to sensory cells on “surfaces” of the body but which have developed deep recessions so that “in this recess a fraction of the environment is more or less surrounded by the organism” (p. 317). Vestibular labyrinth receptors form a special case which are “derived from the extero-ceptive, but later recessed off from it” (p. 336) and which “co–operate together and form functionally one receptive system” with the proprioceptors (p. 341). Thus, the sensory receptors are distinguished as follows:

Proprioceptors found in:-- muscles, joints, tendons, vestibular.
Exteroceptors found in:-- eyes, ears, skin.
Interoceptors found in:-- mouth, stomach, nose.

Sherrington’s classifications of receptors have been followed closely by some authors (Dickinson, 1974, p. 10; Ellison, 1993, p. 75; Rock, 1968) but have been inaccurately represented by others (Wells and Luttgens, 1976, p. 58). The term “somaesthesia” is used similarly to proprioception to refer to stimulations arising from receptors in muscles, tendons, joints, and skin, but not vestibular (Bles, 1981; Lackner and Dizio, 1984; Taub et al., 1973; 1975).

IIA.12 Discussion.

The proprioceptive/exteroceptive distinction between internal stimuli from the body versus external stimuli from the environment has been found to be invalid. In many cases external stimuli such as visual-field motion or audio-field motion (see below) can induce perceptions of self-motion even in the absence of joint, muscle, tendon and vestibular stimulations (eg. G. J. Anderson, 1986) and are vital for the sense of balance or equilibrium (eg. Lee and Aronson, 1974). Thus, the notions of “visual proprioception” (Gibson, 1966, pp. 36-37; Lee and Aronson, 1974; Lee and Lishman, 1975), “visual kinesthesis” (Lishman and Lee, 1973; Rieger, 1983; Warren et al., 1988, p. 646), “visuopostural feedback” (Souder, 1972, p. 15), or even “exproprioception” (literally, perceiving the inside from the outside) (Fitch et al., 1982, pp. 275-276; Lee, 1978) have been used. Receptors in skin must also be classified as both exteroceptors and proprioceptors since they can receive stimulation from the environment or from the body. Because of this invalid internal / external distinction, the term “proprioception” will not be used here.

The terms “kinesthesia” and “proprioception” are also not consistently defined. Sometimes they are considered to be synonymous (Clark and Horch, 1986; Moberg, 1983, p. 1; Schmidt, 1982, p. 202). In the narrowest view stimulations arising from receptors in muscles, tendons, and joints (not labyrinth or skin) are included as proprioceptors (Fitt, 1988, p. 266) or as kinesthetic (Laszlo and Bairstow, 1971). Many other combinations are also used, sometimes including labyrinth, or skin, or both (see Appendix II). In the broadest conception, visual, audio, skin and labyrinth receptors are included together with receptors in muscles, tendons and joints as all contributing to kinesthesia or proprioception (Gibson, 1966, pp. 36-37; Rasch and Burke, 1978, pp. 80-81; Schmidt, 1982, chapter 6).

Kinesthesia is sometimes used to refer to conscious perceptions since the Greek root aesthesia means “to perceive”, while proprioception is not necessarily conscious but may be considered as functioning to elicit unconscious automatic reflex reactions (Ellison, 1993, p. 75; Paillard and Brouchon, 1974, p. 275). McCloskey (1978, p. 764) discusses how Sherrington (1906) used proprioception in this reflexive sense which may not necessarily be conscious. Accordingly, “visual kinesthesia” is used to refer to conscious perceptions of motion (Lishman and Lee, 1973) while “visual proprioception” is used for reflexive reactions to maintain balance (Lee and Lishman, 1975).

Research has also focused on whether muscle spindle receptors have any direct access to conscious perception (Browne et al., 1954; Goodwin et al., 1972a; 1972b; 1972c; Moberg, 1983; Oscarsson and Rosen, 1963; Phillips et al., 1971; Provins, 1958). This is referred to as the “problem of ‘conscious proprioception’” (Gelfan and Carter, 1967). In McCloskey’s (1978) exhaustive review of “kinesthetic sensibility”, and in particular the question of “Are muscles sentient?”, it is stressed that kinesthesia arises as a phenomenological experience contributed to from a multitude of receptors, rather than conscious perceptions from individual receptors. Dickinson (1974, p. 10) reiterates this position that stimulations from individual receptors must be correlated at an unconscious level before a unified kinesthetic or proprioceptive perception rises to consciousness. Therefore unconscious and conscious levels are both part of the perceptual process. Whether these are referred to as kinesthetic or proprioceptive is arbitrary.

IIA.13 Working definitions.

Because of the invalidity of the internal/external distinction, the term “proprioception” will not be used here (following Clark and Horch, 1986, p. 13.2). In light of the other terms available the notion of proprioception is not necessary.

Kinesthesia will be used in its broadest sense to refer to the sensations arising from muscle, tendon, joint, skin, labyrinth, visual, and audio receptors. In addition an interior knowledge of motor commands or “efferent data” (see below) is another source of kinesthetic information. Other “senses” can be classified as kinesthetic sub-systems. These include limb position sense, limb movement sense, sense of linear or rotary self-motion, sense of balance or equilibrium, and the sense of force.

“Somatic” will be used in its typical definition of referring to perceptions arising from receptors in muscles, tendons, joints, and skin. These receptors comprise a complete grouping in themselves within the larger group of kinesthetic receptors.

A variety of sensory receptors and an internal knowledge of motor commands all contribute data which is derived into kinesthetic perceptions.

IIA.21 Muscle Receptors.

Large muscle fibres which produce the muscle’s force of contraction are referred to as extrafusal fibres. Muscle sensory spindle organs are composed of modified muscle fibres referred to as intrafusal fibres and are arranged in parallel to the extrafusal fibres. Within the spindle organ are primary spindle endings, which are sensitive to small quick changes of muscle length and velocity of muscle change-of-length, and secondary spindle endings, which provide data about the overall muscle length (Clark and Horch, 1986; Rothwell, 1987, pp. 76-87).

IIA.22 Tendon Receptors.

Golgi tendon organs are located at muscle-tendon junctions and are attached end-to-end with muscle fibres and tendon filaments. This arrangement allows them to respond to muscle-tendon tension, regardless of muscle length (Clark and Horch, 1986; Rothwell, 1987, pp. 74-104).

Paciniform corpuscles are found near the Golgi tendon organs and are sensitive to vibrations. Free nerve endings are found throughout the muscles and tendons and are sensitive to mechanical pressure and pain.

IIA.23 Joint Receptors.

Golgi sensory receptors are found in ligaments which form the outer layer of joint capsules. Ruffini receptors and paciniform corpuscles are found in the tendon material of the joint capsule. Free nerve endings are found throughout the joint connective tissue (McCloskey, 1978, pp. 766–767). The functioning of these joint receptors is debated (for reviews see Clark and Horch, 1986; McCloskey, 1978; Rothwell, 1987, pp. 74-104). Some researchers have posited that joint receptors respond to particular joint angles (Skoglund, 1956) but this conclusion has been refuted by others (Burgess and Clark, 1969; Grigg, 1975). These researchers have also found a response of joint receptors to pressure within the joint capsule (Clark, 1975; Clark and Burgess, 1975).

IIA.24 Skin Receptors.

A variety of receptors are found in skin (Clark and Horch, 1986; Rothwell, 1987, pp. 74-104). Free nerve endings are close to hair follicles and stimulated by movements of bodily hairs. Merkel disks respond to slow changes in skin pressure. Meissner corpuscles respond to quick changes in skin pressure. Ruffini sensory endings respond to skin stretching in one particular direction but not others. Pacinian corpuscles respond to rapid vibrations.

IIA.25 Vestibular Receptors.

The vestibular system is the non-auditory part of the inner ear and is composed of the otolith organs and the semi-circular canals (Howard, 1986). The otolith organs respond to linear accelerations and also give a constant response to the pull of gravity. The semi-circular canals respond to angular accelerations (ie. rotation). Once a constant velocity is reached the vestibular system stops responding.

IIA.26 Visual Receptors.

The eyes can be dissected into several components including the cornea which gathers light rays, the adjustable opening of the pupil, the oval shaped lens and the retina consisting of photo-sensitive sensory receptor cells (Hood and Finkelstein, 1986; Westheimer, 1986). Eye movements such as monocular focus and binocular focus provide further information for visual perception (Hallett, 1986). Visual field motion refers to the visual stimulations moving across the retina and is associated with perceptions of self-motion (Andersen, 1986; Gibson, 1966). This is accompanied by visual nystagmus (Hallett, 1986). The vision of one’s own body moving is also an important visual kinesthetic stimulation (Adams et al., 1977; Klein and Posner, 1974; Reeve et al., 1986).

IIA.27 Audio Receptors.

Audio receptors consist of the outer ear which collects sound waves into the auditory canal and to the tympanic membrane (ear drum). The middle ear transfers and amplifies these vibrations to the spiral-shaped cochlea of the inner ear where they stimulate sensory endings (Scharf and Buus, 1986; Scharf and Houtsma, 1986). Audio field motion consists of the movement of environmental sounds relative to the body as a result of the body traveling through space. Audition of the body is also an important kinesthetic cue in which body movements can be heard internally, and the effects of movements in the environment can also be heard (Gibson, 1966, p. 37).

IIA.28 Efferent Data.

A mechanism is also hypothesized whereby we have an internal knowledge of motor commands which have been initiated (Clark and Horch, 1986, p. 13.57). This is referred to here as “efferent data” and can be considered to be “central feedback” (as opposed to peripheral feedback from sensory receptors) (Kelso, 1977b; Larish et al., 1979).

Kinesthetic perceptions are rarely derived from a single sensory organ located in one part of the body. Instead, the sensory data from many types of receptors is integrated into a single kinesthetic perception.

IIA.31 Sense of Balance or Equilibrium.

The sense of balance or equilibrium is closely related to the gravitational vertical which is sensed by the vestibular otolith organs and also by the pressure-sensitive receptors in joints and skin. The sense of balance also relies on visual field motion since this will induce reflexes designed to maintain balance (Lee and Aronson, 1974; Lee and Lishman, 1975; Lishman and Lee, 1973).

IIA.32 Self-motion and Limb-motion.

“Self-motion” s used here to refer to motion which either 1) translates the entire body through space to a new location (linear self-motion), 2) turns the entire body around an axis (rotary self-motion), or 3) a combination of translation and rotation (circular self-motion). In contrast, “limb-motion” is used here to refer to the motion of body-parts relative to other body-parts. Similar distinctions have been referred to as “locomotion” versus “contour motion” in movement memory studies (Lasher, 1981, p. 394) and “locomotor” versus “axial” movements in dance technique (Chellis, 1941, pp. 305-308; Gates, 1968, pp. 103-104):

[Axial movement consists of] Movement around an axis, such as arm movements around the individual body as an axis. . . . Swinging, turning, and beating movements are illustrations of axial movement. . . .
[Locomotion consists of] Movement which progresses in space or from place to place . . . Running, skipping, and leaping are examples of locomotor movement. (Love, 1953, pp. 8-9, 54)

According to this definition in dance technique, turning in place would be categorised as an axial movement. However, according to the definition used here both turning and locomotion are categorised as types of self-motion. This follows the use of “self-motion” (Andersen, 1986, Brandt et al., 1975; Wong and Frost, 1978), or “ego-motion” (Brandt et al., 1977) in psychological studies of motion perception. Turning and locomotion are both categorised as types of self-motion because these are kinesthetically perceived in similar ways (see below).

IIA.32a Sense of self-motion.

Somatic and vestibular stimulations might seem to provide the basis for perceptions of self-motion but these are actually dominated by data from visual field motion and audio field motion which can easily induce illusions of self-motion. For example when a large truck next to one’s car begins to move it may be momentarily perceived as one’s own car moving. These illusions are also easily produced in the experimental setting (Andersen, 1986; Bles, 1981). The illusion of self-motion from visual field motion is so robust that Subjects’ knowledge about the illusionary set-up does not decrease the strength of the illusion (Lishman and Lee, 1973, p. 292) and it will occur even when accompanied by conflicting vestibular and somatic sensations (Berthoz et al., 1975; Bles, 1981; Johansson, 1977). However, when visual field motion and vestibular data are both available the perception of self-motion is quickest and speed estimates are most accurate (Melcher and Henn, 1981). The role
of vestibular receptors is indicated since the characteristics of the self-motion illusion are tied to the vestibular characteristic of responding to acceleration but not steady speed (Brandt et al., 1973; Dichgans et al., 1972; Dizio and Lackner, 1986; Held et al., 1975; Reason et al., 1982; Wong and Frost, 1978).

IIA.32b Sense of limb-motion.

Limb movement sense is tied to the perception of limb position since a new position can only be reached by a movement, and every limb movement leads to a new position. However, in experimental settings limb position sense can be separated from limb movement sense (Horch et al., 1975; McCloskey, 1973). Just as with limb position sense, vision of the body can dominate limb movement sense (Klein and Posner, 1974; Laszlo and Baker, 1972). In natural settings, limb movement sense appears to arise from the same sources as limb position sense.

IIA.33 Limb Position Sense.

Limb position sense is dominated by data from the vision of one’s own body and greatly looses accuracy if this source of stimulation is not available (Adams et al., 1977; Posner, 1967). A great deal of research has been devoted to discerning the non-visual mechanisms of position sense (for reviews see McCloskey, 1978; Clark and Horch, 1986). Early research led to the interpretation that joint receptors are responsible for limb position sense (Adams et al., 1977, p. 13; Andrew and Dodt, 1953; Gibson, 1966; Roland, 1979; Skoglund, 1956) although this has been overwhelmingly shown to be erroneous (Burgess and Clark, 1969; Clark, 1975; Clark and Burgess, 1975; Clark et al., 1979; Cross and McCloskey, 1973; Grigg, 1975; Kelso et al., 1980; McCloskey, 1978, pp. 766-767) it is sometimes still adhered to (Ellison, 1993, p. 75; Fitt, 1988, p. 266). Other research has indicated the role of muscle spindle receptors in limb position sense (Craske, 1977; Goodwin et al., 1972a; 1972b; 1972c; McCloskey, 1973). Skin receptors have also been shown to play a vital role for limb position sense in areas of high density of skin receptors (hands and face) (Moberg, 1983).

IIA.34 Sense of Force and Exertion.

The sense of force or sense of exertion can be derived from pressure sensations in skin and joint receptors and tension sensations from tendon receptors. The weight of an object is perceived to be heavier when the muscles lifting it are fatigued (McCloskey et al., 1974), therefore the perception of force appears to be related to efferent data about the amount of exertion being expended. When a reflexive contraction of the muscle is induced (by a physiotherapy vibrator) then Subjects can distinguish between the force encountered by the muscle and the exertion ordered by the motor commands (Ibid). This indicates that the sense of force may be derived from somatic receptors while the sense of exertion is derived from efferent data.

IIA.40 Conclusions: Kinesthesia.

Kinesthesia was identified as arising from sensory stimulations via receptors in muscles, tendons, joints, skin, vestibular apparatus, eyes, ears, and also from an interior knowledge of motor commands (efferent data). This assortment of stimulations from throughout the body are derived into perceptions of balance and equilibrium, self-motion, limb–motion, limb position, and force or exertion.