Spatial acuity and summation on the hand: The role of thermal cues in material discrimination

The spatial characteristics of thermal perception were studied in two experiments that examined how thermal stimuli are processed within the hands. A thermal display that simulates cues associated with making contact with different materials was used in these studies. In the first experiment, participants indicated which of two simulated materials that were presented to the index fingertip was cooler. The results indicated that participants were unable to resolve the two areas of thermal stimulation. In the second experiment, the effects of concurrent thermal stimulation on the ability to discriminate between simulated materials were evaluated. Thermal cues were presented to the middle fingers of both hands and to two adjacent fingers on one hand. Thermal spatial summation was evident across the fingers, which enhanced the ability to discriminate between materials when the cooler stimulus was presented to three fingers. When the same stimulus was presented to the two hands, the stimulation of adjacent fingers altered the perceived thermal response.     

Haptic identification of objects and their depictions

Haptic identification of real objects is superior to that of raised two-dimensional (2-D) depictions. Three explanations of real-object superiority were investigated: contribution of material information, contribution of 3-D shape and size, and greater potential for integration across the fingers. In Experiment 1, subjects, while wearing gloves that gently attenuated material information, haptically identified real objects that provided reduced cues to compliance, mass, and part motion. The gloves permitted exploration with free hand movement, a single outstretched finger, or five outstretched fingers. Performance decreased over these three conditions but was superior to identification of pictures of the same objects in all cases, indicating the contribution of 3-D structure and integration across the fingers. Picture performance was also better with five fingers than with one. In Experiment 2, the subjects wore open-fingered gloves, which provided them with material information. Consequently, the effect of type of exploration was substantially reduced but not eliminated. Material compensates somewhat for limited access to object structure but is not the primary basis for haptic object identification.     

Tactile attention and the perception of moving tactile stimuli

Three experiments investigated the ability of subjects to identify the direction of movement of a pattern across the skin. In Experiments 1 and 2, subjects were required to identify the direction of movement of a pattern presented to one fingerpad while another moving pattern was being presented to an adjacent fingerpad. Subjects were instructed to attend only to the target location. The results showed that accuracy was consistently higher and reaction times were consistently faster when the two patterns moved in the same direction than when they moved in opposite directions. Both effects were largest when the two patterns were presented simultaneously. In Experiment 3, the nontarget location was the contralateral hand. In this case, performance was not affected by the presentation of the nontarget. Combined, the results suggest that movement information is processed across adjacent fingers even when subjects are explicitly instructed to attend only to one finger. Subjects do appear to be able to restrict attention to a single hand.     

Simple movement imitation: Are kinematic features sufficient to map perceptions into actions?

The aim of this study was to pinpoint the nature of the visual features used in the automatic mapping of perceived movements into similar executed movements, following the direct matching hypothesis. In Experiment 1 subjects imitated the lifting of one of two fingers, presented with different orientations. As predicted, stimuli which were further rotated away from the posture of the executing hand elicited slower reaction times. In Experiment 2, we verified that this orientation effect was not a purely perceptual effect by presenting the same stimuli but asking subjects to respond verbally. No orientation effect was found using a verbal response. In Experiment 3, we replaced the moving fingers by two arbitrary objects moving with the trajectories of the finger tips of Experiment 1. The same orientation effect as in Experiment 1 was observed. We conclude that in this experiment participants are using purely kinematic features to map perceived into executed movements.     

Expanding the tactual field of view

Can tactual information be acquired simultaneously by several different fingers? Blind and sighted Ss were asked to scan vertical displays of braille (consisting of either one or two dots) with the index and middle fingers on each hand-using one, two, or four fingers at the same time. Stimuli were recognized most rapidly when the displays were scanned by two fingers on different hands and least rapidly when two fingers on the same hand were used; performance was similar with one finger and with four fingers. The results indicated some parallel perceptual processing of the inputs to the two hands and mutual interference in processing inputs from fingers on the same hand.     

Tactile pattern perception by two fingers: Temporal interference and response competition

The identification of a spatial pattern (target) presented to one fingerpad may be interfered with by the presentation of a second pattern (nontarget) to either the same fingerpad or a second fingerpad. A portion of the interference appears to be due to masking and a portion to response competition. In the present study, vibrotactile spatial patterns were designed to extend over two fingerpads. Target and nontarget patterns were presented to the same two fingerpads with a temporal separation between the two patterns. The function relating target identification to the temporal separation between the target and nontarget was very similar to the functions obtained with one-finger patterns in temporal masking studies. Subsequent measurements showed that a substantial portion of the interference resulted from response competition. Pattern categorization was better when patterns were presented to two fingers on opposite hands than to two fingers on the same hand; however, there was more interference for patterns presented bilaterally than for patterns presented ipsilaterally. The results supported the conclusion that similar processes are involved in the perception of sequences of spatial patterns whether the patterns are presented to one or to two fingers.     

Tactile perception of thermal diffusivity

The thermal diffusivity of an object is a parameter that controls the rate at which heat is extracted from the hand when it touches that object. It is an important feature for distinguishing materials by means of touch. In order to quantitatively describe the ability of human observers to discriminate between materials on the basis of heat extraction rate, we conducted an experiment in which this heat extraction was performed in a controlled way. In different conditions, subjects were repeatedly asked to select from two stimuli the one that cooled faster. The discrimination threshold was around 43% of the extraction rate. A rate that was twice as slow also yielded twice the absolute threshold. When we halved the temperature difference between the beginning and end of the stimulus, the threshold did not change as much. In separate experiments, we investigated the different cues that were available in the stimulus: initial cooling rate and end temperature. Both cues were used for discrimination, but cooling rate seemed to be the most important.     

Same-hand and different-hand finger pairings in two-choice reaction time: presence or absence of response competition?

Several two-choice reaction time experiments have compared conditions in which the two possible responses were from the same hand (same-hand pairing) or from different hands (different-hand pairing). Studies that used only the two relevant fingers on response keys reported shorter reaction times for the different-hand pairing. In other studies, two additional but irrelevant fingers were also in contact with response keys. These fingers were irrelevant in the sense that they never were required to respond. With this procedure, equivalent reaction times were found between same-hand and different-hand pairings. Reeve and Proctor (1988) recently have argued that using only two fingers results in response competition between the two fingers from the same hand, yielding shorter reaction times for the different-hand pairing condition. In contrast, when four fingers are placed on response keys, response competition should be absent for both the same-hand and the different-hand pairing conditions, resulting in equivalent reaction times. In the present work, reaction times associated with the same-hand pairing condition remained unchanged, irrespective of the number of fingers positioned on keys. In the different-hand pairing condition, reaction times were found to be longer when four fingers were used than when only two fingers rested on response keys. Thus, when four fingers are placed on keys, response competition appears to be present rather than absent. Other results showed that the response competition found in the different-hand pairing condition decreases with practice.     

Binary choice reaction time as a criterion of motor equivalence: Further evidence

In a previous study Heuer (1982) found shorter binary choice RTs for finger movements of the right hand when the alternative movement with the left hand was of the same form that in case of different forms. Contrary to expectation there was no corresponding effect if the fingers used were the same of different ones. This result was replicated for right hand RTs as well as left hand RTs and for male and female subjects, using a different experimental design. It is discussed in respect to different preparatory processes in the foreperiod.     

The advantage of specific terms over general terms as cues for sentence recall: Instantiation or retrieval?

Anderson et al. (1976) found that specific terms, which had not appeared in but fit the context of sentences, were better sentence recall cues than the general terms appearing in the sentences. They interpreted this as indicating that general terms in context were encoded on the basis of appropriate instantiations. Experiment 1, using part of the same material, demonstrated that the advantage of specific cues increased when the general terms were omitted from the to-be-remembered materials, and that other specific terms were also effective cues for the same material. Experiment 2 demonstrated that terms that could not be possible intantiations of any words in the sentences, but that shared common meaning with the sentences as a whole, were as effective retrieval cues as the specific terms. The advantage of specific cues was interpreted as attributable to feature overlap between the specific terms and the to-be-remembered materials rather than to instantiation of the general terms.     

任务难度与部分线索效应

部分线索效应是指在学习一个词表后,呈现已学项目中的一部分作为回忆线索去回忆其他项目时,回忆效果反而不如没有线索组的效果好。研究通过三个实验探讨了不同任务难度的部分线索效应。结果表明：（1）在中文词表记忆中存在部分线索效应;（2）随着学习材料难度的提高由部分线索造成的提取成绩的削减量降低。这一研究结果支持了部分线索效应的策略破坏假说。     

Temporal order and tactile patterns

Temporal order judgments (TOJs) were obtained for tactile stimuli presented to subjects' fingerpads. In one set of measurements, pairs of spatial patterns were presented successively to a single fingerpad (same-site condition), to two fingers on the same hand (ipsilateral condition), or to two fingers on opposite hands (bilateral condition). The subjects were instructed to report which one of the two patterns was presented first. TOJs were more accurate in the same-site condition than in either the ipsilateral or the bilateral conditions. In the ipsilateral and bilateral conditions, performance improved when judging which one of two locations received a stimulus first, although performance levels were still lower than in the same-site condition. Increasing the size of the pattern set from which the two patterns to be judged were drawn had only a slight effect on same-site performance and no effect on ipsilateral/bilateral performance; however, changing the nature of the patterns had a considerable effect on same-site performance and a smaller effect on ipsilateral/bilateral performance. Introducing an intensity imbalance between members of the pair of stimuli also had a large effect on same-site TOJs: a less intense stimulus tended to be judged as being presented first. In the bilateral condition, however, there was a small effect in the reverse direction: more intense stimuli tended to be judged as being presented first. The intensity imbalance had no effect in the ipsilateral condition. The results suggest that different mechanisms are responsible for TOJs for patterns presented to the same-site and to separate sites and, furthermore, that separate sites may constitute separate channels for spatial information.     

Similarity of tactual and visual picture recognition with limited field of view.

Subjects attempted to recognize simple line drawings of common objects using either touch or vision. In the touch condition, subjects explored raised line drawings using the distal pad of the index finger or the distal pads both of the index and of the middle fingers. In the visual condition, a computer-driven display was used to simulate tactual exploration. By moving an electronic pen over a digitizing tablet, the subject could explore a line drawing stored in memory; on the display screen a portion of the drawing appeared to move behind a stationary aperture, in concert with the movement of the pen. This aperture was varied in width, thus simulating the use of one or two fingers. In terms of average recognition accuracy and average response latency, recognition performance was virtually the same in the one-finger touch condition and the simulated one-finger vision condition. Visual recognition performance improved considerably when the visual field size was doubled (simulating two fingers), but tactual performance showed little improvement, suggesting that the effective tactual field of view for this task is approximately equal to one finger pad. This latter result agrees with other reports in the literature indicating that integration of two-dimensional pattern information extending over multiple fingers on the same hand is quite poor. The near equivalence of tactual picture perception and narrow-field vision suggests that the difficulties of tactual picture recognition must be largely due to the narrowness of the effective field of view.     

The effect of location on the discrimination of spatial vibrotactile patterns

The present study examined whether the locations of patterns on the skin affected the ability to process information about their shapes. In Experiment 1, pairs of spatial vibrotactile patterns, using the array from the Optacon, were presented sequentially to subjects’ left index fingerpads. The location of each pattern in a pair was varied randomly among four locations on the skin. The subjects responded “same” or “different” on the basis of the shapes of patterns, regardless of their locations. Discrimination accuracy was highest and response time fastest when patterns occupied identical locations (ILs), and performance suffered with increasing distance between patterns. In Experiment 2, pairs were presented to corresponding points or to noncorresponding points on separate fingerpads. When patterns occupied corresponding points on separate fingers, accuracy was lower than when patterns occupied ILs on a single finger, but higher than when patterns occupied noncorresponding points on separate fingers. The results suggested that discriminability declined partly because patterns did not occupy ILs, and partly because separate locations had different densities of innervation.     

Perceptual processing of adjacent and nonadjacent tactile nontargets.

Previous research has shown that subjects appear unable to restrict processing to a single finger and ignore a stimulus presented to an adjacent finger. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that, at least for moving stimuli, an adjacent nontarget is fully processed to the level of incipient response activation. The present study replicated and expanded upon these original findings. The results of Experiment 1 showed that an equally large response-competition effect occurred when the nontarget was presented to adjacent and nonadjacent fingers (on the same hand). The results of Experiment 2 showed that the effects observed in Experiment 1 (and in previous studies) were also obtained with stationary stimuli. Although small, there was some indication in the results of Experiment 2 that interference may dissipate more rapidly with distance with stationary stimuli. An additional finding was that interference effects were observed in both experiments with temporal separations between the target and nontarget of up to 100 msec. In Experiment 3, target and nontarget stimuli were presented to opposite hands. Although reduced, interference was still evident with target and nontarget stimuli presented to opposite hands. Varying the physical distance between hands did not produce any change in the amount of interference. The results suggest that the focus of attention on the skin extends nearly undiminished across the fingers of one hand and is not dependent upon the physical distance between sites of stimulation.     

Perceptual processing of adjacent and nonadjacent tactile nontargets

Previous research has shown that subjects appear unable to restrict processing to a single finger and ignore a stimulus presented to an adjacent finger. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that, at least for moving stimuli, an adjacent nontarget is fully processed to the level of incipient response activation. The present study replicated and expanded upon these original findings. The results of Experiment 1 showed that an equally large response-competition effect occurred when the nontarget was presented to adjacent and nonadjacent fingers4on the same hand). The results of Experiment 2 showed that the effects observed in Experiment 1 (and in previous studies) were also obtained with stationary stimuli. Although small, there was some indication in the results of Experiment 2 that interference may dissipate more rapidly with distance with stationary stimuli. An additional finding was that interference effects were observed in both experiments with temporal separations between the target and nontarget of up to 100 msec. In Experiment 3, target and nontarget stimuli were presented to opposite hands. Although reduced, interference was still evident with target and nontarget stimuli presented to opposite hands. Varying the physical distance between hands did not produce any change in the amount of interference. The results suggest that the focus of attention on the skin extends nearly undiminished across the fingers of one hand and is not dependent upon the physical distance between sites of stimulation.     

Selective responding to the components of multiple visual cues by autistic children

Fifteen autistic and 15 normal Ss were trained to respond to a card containing two visual cues. After this training disctimination was established, the children were tested on the single cues in order to assess whether one or both stimuli had acquired control over their responding. The autistic children (12 of 15) gave evidence for stimulus overselectivity in that they responded correctly to only one of the two component cues. On the other hand, the normal children (12 of 15) showed clear evidence of control by both component cues of the training card. These results were consistent with previous studies, where autistics showed overselectivity when presented with multiple sensory input in several modalities. However, now autistic children appear to have difficulty responding to multiple cues even when both cues are in the same modality. These results were discussed in relation to the experimental literature on selective attention in normally functioning organisms.     

Tactile enumeration of small quantities using one hand

Our study explores various aspects of enumerating small quantities in the tactile modality. Fingertips of one hand were stimulated by a vibro-tactile apparatus (for 100/800 ms). Between 1 and 5 stimuli were presented to the right or the left hand and applied to neighboring (e.g., thumb–index–middle) or non-neighboring (e.g., thumb–middle–pinkie) fingers. The results showed a moderate increase in RT up to 4 stimuli and then a decrease for 5 stimuli. Right hand stimulation evoked more accurate performance than left hand stimulation only under short exposures (100 ms). Importantly, when the stimuli were presented to neighboring fingers, the accuracy rate was higher and the RT was faster than when presented to non-neighboring fingers. We discuss the results and suggest that when the stimuli are presented to one hand the subitizing range is 4 rather than 3. Furthermore, the right hand advantage and the efficiency for neighboring fingers are further support for the association between number and spatial arrangement of the fingers.     

Temperature perception on the hand during static versus dynamic contact with a surface

Innocuous cooling or heating of the forearm can evoke nociceptive sensations, such as burning, stinging, and pricking (low-threshold thermal nociception, LTN), that are inhibited by dynamic contact. In the present study, I investigated whether LTN can also be perceived on the hand, and if so, whether it is normally suppressed by active touching. Innocuous cold (28°, 25°, and 18°C) and warm (38°, 40°, and 43°C) temperatures were delivered to the distal metacarpal pads and intermediate and distal phalanges of the fingers via a handgrip thermode that subjects either statically held or actively grasped. The same temperatures were delivered to the forearm via another thermode that either rested on the arm or was touched to the arm. Subjects rated the intensity of thermal (warmth, cold) and nociceptive (e.g., burning) sensations and indicated the qualities of sensation experienced. The results showed that LTN can be perceived on the hand, although less frequently and less intensely than on the forearm. Dynamic contact inhibited nociceptive and thermal sensations on the hand, although less strongly than on the forearm. These findings indicate that temperature perception on the hand is attenuated and its quality is changed when thermal stimulation is accompanied by dynamic tactile stimulation, as it is during haptic exploration.     

Finger interdependence and unintentional force drifts: Lessons from manipulations of visual feedback

We explored the phenomenon of unintentional finger force drift by using visual feedback on the force produced either by explicitly instructed (master) finger pairs or by non-instructed (enslaved) finger pairs. In particular, we drew contrasting predictions from two hypotheses: that force drifts represented consequences of drifts in effector referent coordinates at the level of individual fingers vs. at the level of finger modes (hypothetical variables accounting for the finger force interdependence). Subjects performed accurate force production with two fingers of a hand, index-ring or middle-little. They received visual feedback on the force produced either by the master fingers or by the other two, enslaved, fingers. The feedback scale was adjusted to ensure that the subjects did not know the difference between these two, randomly presented, conditions. Under feedback on the master finger force, enslaved force showed a consistent drift upward. Under feedback on the enslaved finger force, master force showed a consistent drift downward. The subjects were unaware of the force drifts, which could reach over 35% of the initial force magnitude. The data support the hypothesis on drifts in the referent coordinate at the level of individual digits, not finger modes, as the origin of unintentional force drifts. The consistent increase in the relative amount of force produced by the enslaved fingers suggests that the commonly used methods to quantify enslaving should include relatively brief force production tasks.