Prosthetic embodiment: systematic review on definitions, measures, and experimental paradigms.
Jan Zbinden, Eva Lendaro, Max Ortiz-Catalan
PMID 35346251WHAT IT FOUND
The term “embodiment” lacks a shared definition in prosthetics research, with 34 of 120 articles using it without defining it.
The review recommends measuring “ownership” and “agency” instead, as these are specific, testable experiences that avoid vague comparisons between studies.
Key findings
01There is no consensus on what prosthetic embodiment means, with 34 of 120 articles using the term without a definition.
02The review proposes splitting embodiment into “ownership” (the limb feels like yours) and “agency” (you control it) to create measurable outcomes.
03Current measures like skin temperature or galvanic skin response are unreliable for clinical use, while questionnaires and specific reaction-time tasks are recommended.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they found
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
This is a review of definitions and measurement tools, not a study of patient outcomes. The field is highly heterogeneous, with varying amputation levels and prosthetic technologies, making standardization difficult. Many proposed measures have only been tested in small groups or able-bodied participants, not widely in clinical populations. The review itself does not validate the recommended measures; it synthesizes existing literature to suggest best practices.
Declared interests
Funded by Stiftelsen Promobilia, IngaBritt och Arne Lundbergs Forskningsstiftelse, Vetenskapsrådet, and Chalmers University of Technology. No author conflicts of interest are explicitly detailed beyond funding sources in the provided text.
The easy way to misread this
Do not interpret this paper as evidence that any specific prosthetic technique improves embodiment. It is a methodological review proposing how to measure subjective experiences like ownership and agency in future research, not a report of clinical efficacy.