Performance in haptic geometrical matching tasks depends on movement and position of the arms

Previous research on the properties of haptic space has shown systematic deviations from Euclidean parallelity in haptic parallelity tasks. The mainstream explanation for these deviations is that, in order to perform the task, participants generate a spatial representation with a frame of reference that integrates egocentric and allocentric components. Several studies have shown that the amount and type of deviations are affected by the configurations with regard to the arms and the rods to be matched. The present study reports 4 experiments that further address the effects of task configurations and body movements. Experiments 1 and 2 replicate and extend previous results concerning haptic matching task and acoustic pointing tasks. The third experiment includes acoustic cues aligned differentially to the reference and test bars. The fourth experiment concerns a geometrical matching task performed in the rear peripersonal space. Results show that haptic deviations from the Euclidean space are modulated by the available cues and by the body configurations. This indicates the need for further analysis on the role of body, arm and shoulder positions, and movement effects in haptic space perception.     

Haptic space processing--allocentric and egocentric reference frames.

In this paper a haptic matching, task is used to analyze haptic spatial processing. In various conditions, blindfolded participants were asked to make a test bar parallel to a reference bar. This always resulted in large but systematic deviations. It will be shown that the results can be described with a model in which an egocentric reference frame biases the participants' settings: What a participant haptically perceives as parallel is a weighted average of parallel in allocentric space and parallel in egocentric space. The basis of the egocentric reference frame is uncertain. There is strong evidence that at least a hand-centred reference frame is involved, but possibly a body-centred reference frame also plays a role.     

The contributions of egocentric and allocentric reference frames in haptic spatial tasks

The influence of egocentric and allocentric reference frames on performance in haptic spatial tasks, was tested in three conditions. Blindfolded subjects had to make two bars haptically parallel, perpendicular or mirrored in the midsagittal plane. The hypothesis is that the contributions of egocentric and allocentric reference frames are combined, resulting in settings that lie in between the allo-representation and the ego-representation. This leads to different predictions for the outcome of different conditions. All findings were consistent with the hypothesis. In addition, for subjects with large deviations a reversal of the oblique effect was found once again, which provides extra support for the hypothesis.     

Haptic perception of spatial relations

There are some indications that haptic space like visual space is not Euclidean (e.g. Blumenfeld, 1937 Acta Psychologica 2 125-174). In a series of experiments, we investigated the haptic perception of spatial relations in a systematic way. We restricted ourselves to a horizontal plane at waist height. Blindfolded subjects were asked to perform three tasks with their right hand: (i) a reference bar was presented under four different orientations and subjects were asked to rotate a test bar such that it felt to be parallel to the reference bar; (ii) subjects had to rotate two test bars in such a way that they felt collinear; (iii) subjects had to point a test bar in the direction of a marker. Bars and marker could appear at nine different locations. In all experiments large systematic deviations (up to 40 degrees) were made. The deviations strongly correlated with horizontal (right-left) but not with vertical (forward-backward) distance. Subjects showed qualitatively identical trends but the size of the deviations was strongly subject-dependent. In addition, a significant haptic oblique effect was found. These results provide strong evidence that haptic space in non-Euclidean.     

Reference frame preferences in haptics differ for the blind and sighted in the horizontal but not in the vertical plane

We investigated which reference frames are preferred when matching spatial language to the haptic domain. Sighted, low-vision, and blind participants were tested on a haptic-sentence-verification task where participants had to haptically explore different configurations of a ball and a shoe and judge the relation between them. Results from the spatial relation "above", in the vertical plane, showed that various reference frames are available after haptic inspection of a configuration. Moreover, the pattern of results was similar for all three groups and resembled patterns found for the sighted on visual sentence-verification tasks. In contrast, when judging the spatial relation "in front", in the horizontal plane, the blind showed a markedly different response pattern. The sighted and low-vision participants did not show a clear preference for either the absolute/relative or the intrinsic reference frame when these frames were dissociated. The blind, on the other hand, showed a clear preference for the intrinsic reference frame. In the absence of a dominant cue, such as gravity in the vertical plane, the blind might emphasise the functional relationship between the objects owing to enhanced experience with haptic exploration of objects.     

The eyes grasp,the hands see: Metric category knowledge transfers between vision and touch

Categorization of seen objects is often determined by the shapes of objects. However, shape is not exclusive to the visual modality: The haptic system also is expert at identifying shapes. Hence, an important question for understanding shape processing is whether humans store separate modality-dependent shape representations, or whether information is integrated into one multisensory representation. To answer this question, we created a metric space of computer-generated novel objects varying in shape. These objects were then printed using a 3-D printer, to generate tangible stimuli. In a categorization experiment, participants first explored the objects visually and haptically. We found that both modalities led to highly similar categorization behavior. Next, participants were trained either visually or haptically on shape categories within the metric space. As expected, visual training increased visual performance, and haptic training increased haptic performance. Importantly, however, we found that visual training also improved haptic performance, and vice versa. Two additional experiments showed that the location of the categorical boundary in the metric space also transferred across modalities, as did heightened discriminability of objects adjacent to the boundary. This observed transfer of metric category knowledge across modalities indicates that visual and haptic forms of shape information are integrated into a shared multisensory representation.     

Similarity and categorization: from vision to touch

Even though human perceptual development relies on combining multiple modalities, most categorization studies so far have focused on the visual modality. To better understand the mechanisms underlying multisensory categorization, we analyzed visual and haptic perceptual spaces and compared them with human categorization behavior. As stimuli we used a three-dimensional object space of complex, parametrically-defined objects. First, we gathered similarity ratings for all objects and analyzed the perceptual spaces of both modalities using multidimensional scaling analysis. Next, we performed three different categorization tasks which are representative of every-day learning scenarios: in a fully unconstrained task, objects were freely categorized, in a semi-constrained task, exactly three groups had to be created, whereas in a constrained task, participants received three prototype objects and had to assign all other objects accordingly. We found that the haptic modality was on par with the visual modality both in recovering the topology of the physical space and in solving the categorization tasks. We also found that within-category similarity was consistently higher than across-category similarity for all categorization tasks and thus show how perceptual spaces based on similarity can explain visual and haptic object categorization. Our results suggest that both modalities employ similar processes in forming categories of complex objects.     

Haptic parallelity perception on the frontoparallel plane: the involvement of reference frames

It has been established that spatial representation in the haptic modality is subject to systematic distortions. In this study, the haptic perception of parallelity on the frontoparallel plane was investigated in a bimanual matching paradigm. Eight reference orientations and 23 combinations of stimulus locations were used. The current hypothesis from studies conducted on the horizontal and midsagittal planes presupposes that what is haptically perceived as parallel is a product of weighted contributions from both egocentric and allocentric reference frames. In our study, we assessed a correlation between deviations from the veridical and hand/arm postures and found support for the role of an intermediate frame of reference in modulating haptic parallelity on the frontoparallel plane as well. Moreover, a subject-dependent biasing influence of the egocentric reference frame determines both the reversal of the oblique effect and a scaling effect in deviations as a function of bar position.     

Haptic orientation perception benefits from visual experience: evidence from early-blind, late-blind, and sighted people

Early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded sighted participants were presented with two haptic allocentric spatial tasks: a parallel-setting task, in an immediate and a 10-sec delay condition, and a task in which the orientation of a single bar was judged verbally. With respect to deviation size, the data suggest that mental visual processing filled a beneficial role in both tasks. In the parallel-setting task, the early blind performed more variably and showed no improvement with delay, whereas the late blind did improve, but less than the sighted did. In the verbal judgment task, both early- and late-blind participants displayed larger deviations than the sighted controls. Differences between the groups were absent or much weaker with respect to the haptic oblique effect, a finding that reinforces the view that this effect is not of visual origin. The role of visual processing mechanisms and visual experience in haptic spatial tasks is discussed.     

Haptic search is more efficient when the stimulus can be interpreted as consisting of fewer items

In a typical haptic search task, separate items are presented to individual fingertips. The time to find a specific item generally increases with the number of items, but is it the number of items or the number of fingers that determines search time? To find out, we conducted haptic search experiments in which horizontal lines made of swell paper were presented to either two, four or six of the participants' fingertips. The task for the participant was to lift the finger under which they did not feel (part of) a line. In one of the conditions separate non-aligned lines were presented to the fingertips so that the number of items increased with the number of fingers used. In two other conditions the participants had to find an interruption in a single straight line under one of the fingertips. These conditions differed in the size of the gap. If only the number of items in the tactile display were important, search times would increase with the number of fingers in the first condition, but not depend on the number of fingers used in the other two conditions. In all conditions we found that the search time increased with the number of fingers used. However, this increase was smaller in the single line condition in which the gap was large enough for one finger to not make any contact with the line. Thus, the number of fingers involved determines the haptic search time, but search is more efficient when the stimulus can be interpreted as consisting of fewer items.     

Visual space under free viewing conditions

Most research on visual space has been done under restricted viewing conditions and in reduced environments. In our experiments, observers performed an exocentric pointing task, a collinearity task, and a parallelity task in a entirely visible room. We varied the relative distances between the objects and the observer and the separation angle between the two objects. We were able to compare our data directly with data from experiments in an environment with less monocular depth information present. We expected that in a richer environment and under less restrictive viewing conditions, the settings would deviate less from the veridical settings. However, large systematic deviations from veridical settings were found for all three tasks. The structure of these deviations was task dependent, and the structure and the deviations themselves were comparable to those obtained under more restricted circumstances. Thus, the additional information was not used effectively by the observers.     

Differences between early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted people in haptic spatial-configuration learning and resulting memory traces

The roles of visual and haptic experience in different aspects of haptic processing of objects in peripersonal space are examined. In three trials, early-blind, late-blind, and blindfolded-sighted individuals had to match ten shapes haptically to the cut-outs in a board as fast as possible. Both blind groups were much faster than the sighted in all three trials. All three groups improved considerably from trial to trial. In particular, the sighted group showed a strong improvement from the first to the second trial. While superiority of the blind remained for speeded matching after rotation of the stimulus frame, coordinate positional-memory scores in a non-speeded free-recall trial showed no significant differences between the groups. Moreover, when assessed with a verbal response, categorical spatial-memory appeared strongest in the late-blind group. The role of haptic and visual experience thus appears to depend on the task aspect tested.     

The structure of frontoparallel haptic space is task dependent

In three experiments, we investigated the structure of frontoparallel haptic space. In the first experiment, we asked blindfolded participants to rotate a matching bar so that it felt parallel to the reference bar, the bars could be at various positions in the frontoparallel plane. Large systematic errors were observed, in which orientations that were perceived to be parallel were not physically parallel. In two subsequent experiments, we investigated the origin of these errors. In Experiment 2, we asked participants to verbally report the orientation of haptically presented bars. In this task, participants made errors that were considerably smaller than those made in Experiment 1. In Experiment 3, we asked participants to set bars in a verbally instructed orientation, and they also made errors significantly smaller than those observed in Experiment 1. The data suggest that the errors in the matching task originate from the transfer of the reference orientation to the matching-bar position.     

Repetition priming and the haptic recognition of familiar and unfamiliar objects

In four experiments, we examined the haptic recognition of 3-D objects. In Experiment 1, blindfolded participants named everyday objects presented haptically in two blocks. There was significant priming of naming, but no cost of an object changing orientation between blocks. However, typical orientations of objects were recognized more quickly than nonstandard orientations. In Experiment 2, participants accurately performed an unannounced test of memory for orientation. The lack of orientation-specific priming in Experiment 1, therefore, was not because participants could not remember the orientation at which they had first felt an object. In Experiment 3, we examined haptic naming of objects that were primed either haptically or visually. Haptic priming was greater than visual priming, although significant cross-modal priming was also observed. In Experiment 4, we tested recognition memory for familiar and unfamiliar objects using an old-new recognition task. Objects were recognized best when they were presented in the same orientation in both blocks, suggesting that haptic object recognition is orientation sensitive. Photographs of the unfamiliar objects may be downloaded from www.psychonomic.org/archive.     

Egocentric reference frame bias in the palmar haptic perception of surface orientation

The effect of egocentric reference frames on palmar haptic perception of orientation was investigated in vertically separated locations in a sagittal plane. Reference stimuli to be haptically matched were presented either haptically (to the contralateral hand) or visually. As in prior investigations of haptic orientation perception, a strong egocentric bias was found, such that haptic orientation matches made in the lower part of personal space were much lower (i.e., were perceived as being higher) than those made at eye level. The same haptic bias was observed both when the reference surface to be matched was observed visually and when bimanual matching was used. These findings support the conclusion that, despite the presence of an unambiguous allocentric (gravitational) reference frame in vertical planes, haptic orientation perception in the sagittal plane reflects an egocentric bias.     

Crossmodal interaction between the mental number line and peripersonal haptic space representation in sighted and blind individuals

Humans tend to represent numbers in the form of a mental number line. Here we show that the mental number line can modulate the representation of peripersonal haptic space in a crossmodal fashion and that this interaction is not visually mediated. Sighted and early-blind participants were asked to haptically explore rods of different lengths and to indicate midpoints of those rods. During each trial, either a small (2) or a large (8) number was presented in the auditory modality. When no numbers were presented, participants tended to bisect the rods to the left of the actual midpoint, consistent with the notion of pseudoneglect. In both groups, this bias was significantly increased by the presentation of a small number and was significantly reduced by the presentation of a large number. Hence, spatial shifts of attention induced by number processing are not limited to visual space or embodied responses but extend to haptic peripersonal space and occur crossmodally without requiring the activation of a visuospatial representation.     

Haptic perception of linear extent.

The perception of linear extent in haptic touch appears to be anisotropic, in that haptically perceived extents can depend on the spatial orientation and location of the object and, thus, on the direction of exploratory motion. Experiments 1 and 2 quantified how the haptic perception of linear extent depended on the type of motion (radial or tangential to the body) when subjects explored different stimulus objects (raised lines or solid blocks) varying in length and in relative spatial location. Relatively narrow, shallow, raised lines were judged to be longer, by magnitude estimation, than solid blocks. Consistent with earlier reports, stimuli explored with radial arm motions were judged to be longer than identical stimuli explored with tangential motions; this difference did not depend consistently on the lateral position of the stimulus object, the direction of movement (toward or away from the body), or the distance of the hand from the body but did depend slightly on the angular position of the shoulder. Experiment 3 showed that the radial-tangential effect could be explained by temporal differences in exploratory movements, implying that the apparent anisotropy is not intrinsic to the structure of haptic space.     

Large systematic deviations in a bimanual parallelity task: further analysis of contributing factors

Previous studies showed that what subjects haptically perceive as parallel deviates largely from what is actually physically parallel [Perception 28 (1999) 1001; Acta Psychol. 109 (2002) 25; Perception 28 (1999) 781]. It also turned out that the deviations were strongly subject-dependent. It was hypothesized that what is haptically parallel is decided in a frame of reference intermediate to an allocentric and an egocentric one. The purposes of the present study were to collect more evidence for this hypothesis and to investigate the factor(s) that determines the specific weighting between the two reference frames. We found a highly significant reversal of a haptic oblique effect (in context: larger systematic deviations for oblique orientations) for subjects with large deviations. This reversal provides convincing evidence that an intermediate frame of reference is used for the decision of haptic parallelity. Contrary to common expectation, several factors that might have been of influence on the weighting of the two frames of reference, such as arm length, arm span, shoulder width, turned out to be irrelevant. Surprisingly, the only factors that seem to be of influence are gender and job experience or education.     

Haptic perception of linear extent

The perception of linear extent in haptic touch appears to be anisotropic, in that haptically perceived extents can depend on the spatial orientation and location of the object and, thus, on the direction of exploratory motion. Experiments 1 and 2 quantified how the haptic perception of linear extent depended on the type of motion (radial or tangential to the body) when subjects explored different stimulus objects (raised lines or solid blocks) varying in length and in relative spatial location. Relatively narrow, shallow, raised lines were judged to be longer, by magnitude estimation, than solid blocks. Consistent with earlier reports, stimuli explored with radial arm motions were judged to be longer than identical stimuli explored with tangential motions; this difference did not depend consistently on the lateral position of the stimulus object, the direction of movement (toward or away from the body), or the distance of the hand from the body but did depend slightly on the angular position of the shoulder. Experiment 3 showed that the radial-tangential effect could be explained by temporal differences in exploratory movements, implying that the apparent anisotropy is not intrinsic to the structure of haptic space.