Can tactile stimuli be subitised? An unresolved controversy within the literature on numerosity judgments

There is a growing interest in the question whether the phenomenon of subitising (fast and accurate detection of fewer than 4-5 stimuli presented simultaneously), widely thought to affect numerosity judgments in vision, can also affect the processing of tactile stimuli. In a recent study, in which multiple tactile stimuli were simultaneously presented across the body surface, Gallace et al (2006 Perception 35 247-266) concluded that tactile stimuli cannot be subitised. By contrast, Riggs et al (2006 Psychological Science 17 271 275), who presented tactile stimuli to participants' fingertips, came to precisely the opposite conclusion, arguing instead that subitising does occur in touch. Here, we re-analyse the data from both studies using more powerful statistical procedures. We show that Riggs et al's error data do not offer strong support for the subitising account and, what is more, Gallace et al's data are not entirely compatible with a linear model account of numerosity judgments in humans either. We then report an experiment in which we compare numerosity judgments for stimuli presented on the fingertips with those for stimuli presented on the rest of the body surface. The results show no major differences between the fingers and the rest of the body, and an absence of subitising in either condition. On the basis of these observations, we discuss whether the purported existence of subitisation in touch reflects a genuine cognitive phenomenon, or whether, instead, it may reflect a bias in the interpretation of the particular psychometric functions that happen to have been chosen by researchers to fit their data.     

Multisensory numerosity judgments for visual and tactile stimuli

To date, numerosity judgments have been studied only under conditions of unimodal stimulus presentation. It is therefore unclear whether the same limitations on correctly reporting the number of unimodal visual or tactile stimuli presented in a display might be expected under conditions in which participants have to count stimuli presented simultaneously in two or more different sensory modalities. In Experiment 1, we investigated numerosity judgments using both unimodal and bimodal displays consisting of one to six vibrotactile stimuli (presented over the body surface) and one to six visual stimuli (seen on the body via mirror reflection). Participants had to count the number of stimuli regardless of their modality of presentation. Bimodal numerosity judgments were significantly less accurate than predicted on the basis of an independent modality-specific resources account, thus showing that numerosity judgments might rely on a unitary amodal system instead. The results of a second experiment demonstrated that divided attention costs could not account for the poor performance in the bimodal conditions of Experiment 1. We discuss these results in relation to current theories of cross-modal integration and to the cognitive resources and/or common higher order spatial representations possibly accessed by both visual and tactile stimuli.     

Tactile short-term memory for stimuli presented on the fingertips and across the rest of the body surface

The aim of this study was to investigate the extent to which tactile information that is unavailable for full conscious report can be accessed using partial-report procedures. In Experiment 1, participants reported the total number of tactile stimuli (up to six) presented simultaneously to their fingertips (numerosity judgment task). In another condition, after being presented with the tactile display, they had to detect whether or not the position indicated by a (visual or tactile) probe had previously contained a tactile stimulus (partial-report task). Participants correctly reported up to three stimuli in the numerosity judgment task, but their performance was far better in the partial-report task: Up to six stimuli were perceived at the shortest target-probe intervals. A similar pattern of results was observed when the participants performed a concurrent articulatory suppression task (Exp. 2). The results of a final experiment revealed that performance in the partial-report task was overall better for stimuli presented on the fingertips than for stimuli presented across the rest of the body surface. These results demonstrate that tactile information that is unavailable for report in a numerosity task can nevertheless sometimes still be accessed when a partial-report procedure is used instead.     

Tactile—visual temporal ventriloquism: No effect of spatial disparity

Participants made visual temporal order judgments (TOJs) about which of two lights appeared first while taskirrelevant vibrotactile stimuli delivered to the index finger were presented before the first and after the second light. Temporally misaligned tactile stimuli captured the onsets of the lights, thereby improving sensitivity on the visual TOJ task, indicative of tactile-visual (TV) temporal ventriloquism (Experiment 1). The size of this effect was comparable to auditory-visual (AV) temporal ventriloquism (Experiment 2). Spatial discordance between the TV stimuli, as in the AV case, did not harm the effect (Experiments 3 and 4). TV stimuli thus behaved like AV stimuli, demonstrating that spatial co-occurrence is not a necessary constraint for intersensory pairing to occur.     

Tactile--visual temporal ventriloquism: no effect of spatial disparity

Participants made visual temporal order judgments (TOJs) about which of two lights appeared first while task-irrelevant vibrotactile stimuli delivered to the index finger were presented before the first and after the second light. Temporally misaligned tactile stimuli captured the onsets of the lights, thereby improving sensitivity on the visual TOJ task, indicative of tactile-visual (TV) temporal ventriloquism (Experiment 1). The size of this effect was comparable to auditory-visual (AV) temporal ventriloquism (Experiment 2). Spatial discordance between the TV stimuli, as in the AV case, did not harm the effect (Experiments 3 and 4). TV stimuli thus behaved like AV stimuli, demonstrating that spatial co-occurrence is not a necessary constraint for intersensory pairing to occur.     

Recent developments in the study of tactile attention.

The last few years have seen a rapid growth of research on the topic of tactile attention. We review the evidence showing that attention can be directed to the tactile modality, or to the region of space where tactile stimuli are presented, in either an endogenous or exogenous (top-down or bottom-up) manner. We highlight the latest findings on the interaction between these two forms of attentional orienting in touch. We also review the latest research on tactile numerosity judgments and change detection highlighting the severe cognitive (attentional) limitations that constrain people's ability to process more complex tactile information displays. These findings are particularly important given that tactile interfaces are currently being developed for a number of different application domains.     

Tactile "capture" of audition

Previous research has demonstrated that the localization of auditory or tactile stimuli can be biased by the simultaneous presentation of a visual stimulus from a different spatial position. We investigated whether auditory localization judgments could also be affected by the presentation of spatially displaced tactile stimuli, using a procedure designed to reveal perceptual interactions across modalities. Participants made left-right discrimination responses regarding the perceived location of sounds, which were presented either in isolation or together with tactile stimulation to the fingertips. The results demonstrate that the apparent location of a sound can be biased toward tactile stimulation when it is synchronous, but not when it is asynchronous, with the auditory event. Directing attention to the tactile modality did not increase the bias of sound localization toward synchronous tactile stimulation. These results provide the first demonstration of the tactile capture of audition.     

Tactile “capture” of audition

Previous research has demonstrated that the localization of auditory or tactile stimuli can be biased by the simultaneous presentation of a visual stimulus from a different spatial position. We investigated whether auditory localization judgments could also be affected by the presentation of spatially displaced tactile stimuli, using a procedure designed to reveal perceptual interactions across modalities. Participants made left—right discrimination responses regarding the perceived location of sounds, which were presented either in isolation or together with tactile stimulation to the fingertips. The results demonstrate that the apparent location of a sound can be biased toward tactile stimulation when it is synchronous, but not when it is asynchronous, with the auditory event. Directing attention to the tactile modality did not increase the bias of sound localization toward synchronous tactile stimulation. These results provide the first demonstration of the tactilecapture of audition.     

Visual motion interferes with tactile motion perception

Previous studies have demonstrated that visual apparent motion can alter the judgment of auditory apparent motion. We investigated the effect of visual apparent motion on judgments of the direction of tactile apparent motion. When visual motion was presented at the same time as, but in a direction opposite to, tactile motion, accuracy in judging the direction of tactile apparent motion was substantially reduced. This reduction in performance is referred to as 'the congruency effect'. Similar effects were observed when the visual display was placed either near to the tactile display or at some distance from the tactile display (experiment 1). In experiment 2, the relative alignment between the visual and tactile directions of motion was varied. The size of the congruency effect was similar at 0 degrees and 45 degrees alignments but much reduced at a 90 degrees alignment. In experiment 3, subjects made confidence ratings of their judgments of the direction of the tactile motion. The results indicated that the congruency effect was not due to subjects being unsure of the direction of motion and being forced to guess. In experiment 4, static visual stimuli were shown to have no effect on the judgments of direction of the tactile stimuli. The extent to which the congruency effect reflects capture effects and is the result of perceptual versus post-perceptual processes is discussed.     

Sensory temporal processing in adults with early hearing loss

This study examined tactile and visual temporal processing in adults with early loss of hearing. The tactile task consisted of punctate stimulations that were delivered to one or both hands by a mechanical tactile stimulator. Pairs of light emitting diodes were presented on a display for visual stimulation. Responses consisted of YES or NO judgments as to whether the onset of the pairs of stimuli was perceived simultaneously or non-simultaneously. Tactile and visual temporal thresholds were significantly higher for the deaf group when compared to controls. In contrast to controls, tactile and visual temporal thresholds for the deaf group did not differ when presentation locations were examined. Overall findings of this study support the notion that temporal processing is compromised following early deafness regardless of the spatial location in which the stimuli are presented.     

Tactile selective attention and body posture: assessing the multisensory contributions of vision and proprioception

This study addressed the role of proprioceptive and visual cues to body posture during the deployment of tactile spatial attention. Participants made speeded elevation judgments (up vs. down) to vibrotactile targets presented to the finger or thumb of either hand, while attempting to ignore vibrotactile distractors presented to the opposite hand. The first two experiments established the validity of this paradigm and showed that congruency effects were stronger when the target hand was uncertain (Experiment 1) than when it was certain (Experiment 2). Varying the orientation of the hands revealed that these congruency effects were determined by the position of the target and distractor in external space, and not by the particular skin sites stimulated (Experiment 3). Congruency effects increased as the hands were brought closer together in the dark (Experiment 4), demonstrating the role of proprioceptive input in modulating tactile selective attention. This spatial modulation was also demonstrated when a mirror was used to alter the visually perceived separation between the hands (Experiment 5). These results suggest that tactile, spatially selective attention can operate according to an abstract spatial frame of reference, which is significantly modulated by multisensory contributions from both proprioception and vision.     

A left hemisphere, but not right hemispace, advantage for tactual simultaneity judgments

Hemispheric asymmetries for tactile simultaneity judgments were investigated in 34 dextral adults. Pairs of vibrotactile stimuli with simultaneous or successive onsets were delivered unilaterally to the left or right hand. Participants made a forced-choice, bipedal response, indicating whether a stimulus was simultaneous or successive. The effect of hemispatial attentional biases was investigated, using ipsilateral (arms uncrossed) and contralateral (arms crossed) hand placements. Trials presented to the right hand were associated with fewer errors and a trend for faster response times than were those presented to the left hand. There was no asymmetry in response bias. Manipulations of hemispace did not affect the right hand advantage. These results confirm the existence of a left hemisphere temporal-processing advantage but fail to demonstrate that the asymmetry is the result of a rightward attentional bias. The implications of these results for absolute and relative models of hemispheric specialization are discussed.     

The cognitive and neural correlates of "tactile consciousness": a multisensory perspective

People's awareness of tactile stimuli has been investigated in far less detail than their awareness of stimuli in other sensory modalities. In an attempt to fill this gap, we provide an overview of studies that are pertinent to the topic of tactile consciousness. We discuss the results of research that has investigated phenomena such as "change blindness", phantom limb sensations, and numerosity judgments in tactile perception, together with the results obtained from the study of patients affected by deficits that can adversely affect tactile perception such as neglect, extinction, and numbsense. The similarities as well as some of the important differences that have emerged when visual and tactile conscious information processing have been compared using similar experimental procedures are highlighted. We suggest that conscious information processing in the tactile modality cannot be separated completely from the more general processing of spatial information in the brain. Finally, the importance of considering tactile consciousness within the larger framework of multisensory information processing is also discussed.     

Audiotactile temporal order judgments

We report a series of three experiments in which participants made unspeeded 'Which modality came first?' temporal order judgments (TOJs) to pairs of auditory and tactile stimuli presented at varying stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs) using the method of constant stimuli. The stimuli were presented from either the same or different locations in order to explore the potential effect of redundant spatial information on audiotactile temporal perception. In Experiment 1, the auditory and tactile stimuli had to be separated by nearly 80 ms for inexperienced participants to be able to judge their temporal order accurately (i.e., for the just noticeable difference (JND) to be achieved), no matter whether the stimuli were presented from the same or different spatial positions. More experienced psychophysical observers (Experiment 2) also failed to show any effect of relative spatial position on audiotactile TOJ performance, despite having much lower JNDs (40 ms) overall. A similar pattern of results was found in Experiment 3 when silent electrocutaneous stimulation was used rather than vibrotactile stimulation. Thus, relative spatial position seems to be a less important factor in determining performance for audiotactile TOJ than for other modality pairings (e.g., audiovisual and visuotactile).     

Modes of vibrotactile pattern generation

Two modes of generating vibrotactile patterns, static and scanned, were examined. In the static mode, all elements making up the pattern were turned on and off simultaneously. In the scanned mode, the pattern to be identified was moved across the tactile array. The patterns were letters of the alphabet presented to the fingertips by means of the Optacon, a reading aid for the blind. The results of the first experiment showed that the performance on a letter recognition task decreased as pattern duration decreased and that at all durations below 200-msec performance in the static mode was better than in the scanned mode. Good letter recognition was possible at durations of 4 msec in the static mode. The results of the second experiment showed that letter recognition in the static mode was highly dependent on the perceived intensity of the letters presented, whereas intensity changes in the scanned mode had little effect on letter recognition. The results of the third experiment showed that both modes of pattern presentation produced similar results in the presence of masking stimuli. The implications of the results for cutaneous pattern perception and information transmission and visual letter recognition are discussed.     

The failure to detect tactile change: A tactile analogue of visual change blindness

A large body of empirical research now shows that people are surprisingly poor at detecting significant changes in visually presented scenes. This phenomenon is known aschange blindness in vision. A similar phenomenon occurs in audition, but to date no such effect has been documented in touch. In the present study, we explored the ability of people to detect changes introduced between two consecutively presented vibrotactile patterns presented over the body surface. The patterns consisted of two or three vibrotactile stimuli presented for 200 msec. The position of one of the vibrotactile stimuli composing the display was repeatedly changed (alternating between two different positions) on 50% of the trials, but the same pattern was presented repeatedly on the remaining trials. Three conditions were investigated: No interval between the patterns, an empty interval between the patterns, and a masked interval between the patterns. Change detection was near perfect in the no-interval block. Performance deteriorated somewhat in the empty-interval block, but by far the worst change detection performance occurred in the masked-interval block. These results demonstrate that “change blindness” can also affect tactile perception.     

Recognition memory for tactile sequences.

In three experiments participants were required to compare the similarity in item order for two temporally separated sequences of tactile stimuli presented to the fingers of the hand. Between-sequence articulatory suppression but not tactile interference impaired recognition accuracy (Experiment 1), and the null effect of tactile interference was not due to the second tactile sequence overwriting the sensory record of the first sequence (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 showed that compared to a condition where the second sequence was presented in the tactile modality only, recognition was enhanced when the second sequence was seen presented either to the hand or on a diagrammatic representation of a hand. A final experiment showed that the effects of Experiment 1 were replicated when the underside of the forearm was used for stimulus presentation, suggesting that the data are not idiosyncratic to the first method of presentation. The pattern of results suggests memory for a sequence of tactile stimuli involves the deployment of strategies utilising a combination of verbal rehearsal and visuo-spatial recoding rather than relying solely on the retention of sensory traces. This is taken to reflect limitations in both the capacity and duration of tactile sensory memory.     

Vibrotactile localization on the arm: effects of place, space, and age

Although tactile acuity has been explored for touch stimuli, vibrotactile resolution on the skin has not. In the present experiments, we explored the ability to localize vibrotactile stimuli on a linear array of tactors on the forearm. We examined the influence of a number of stimulus parameters, including the frequency of the vibratory stimulus, the locations of the stimulus sites on the body relative to specific body references or landmarks, the proximity among driven loci, and the age of the observer. Stimulus frequency and age group showed much less of an effect on localization than was expected. The position of stimulus sites relative to body landmarks and the separation among sites exerted the strongest influence on localization accuracy, and these effects could be mimicked by introducing an "artificial" referent into the tactile array.     

Effect of orientation on visual and vibrotactile letter identification

The effect of stimulus orientation of letters presented either visually or vibrotactually was examined to obtain basic information on sensory substitution using the tactile sense. The reaction time (RT) to identify the letters F and R presented in normal or mirror-image form at four orientations each was measured. In addition, conditions of 0 degree and 270 degrees of head rotation from vertical and arm rotation from the midline axis were employed. Data from 5 trained subjects showed that vibrotactile RTs were always longer than visual RTs. Stimulus rotation away from normal orientation increased visual RTs significantly but not vibrotactile RTs. Visual orientation effect then seemed to be determined by the body-coordinate system but not the vibrotactile orientation. Although further studies are warranted, from the results of this experiment, any convenient and constant stimulus orientation could be used with a wearable vibrotactile display system to exploit passive touch.     

Audiotactile interactions in temporal perception

In the present review, we focus on how commonalities in the ontogenetic development of the auditory and tactile sensory systems may inform the interplay between these signals in the temporal domain. In particular, we describe the results of behavioral studies that have investigated temporal resolution (in temporal order, synchrony/asynchrony, and simultaneity judgment tasks), as well as temporal numerosity perception, and similarities in the perception of frequency across touch and hearing. The evidence reviewed here highlights features of audiotactile temporal perception that are distinctive from those seen for other pairings of sensory modalities. For instance, audiotactile interactions are characterized in certain tasks (e.g., temporal numerosity judgments) by a more balanced reciprocal influence than are other modality pairings. Moreover, relative spatial position plays a different role in the temporal order and temporal recalibration processes for audiotactile stimulus pairings than for other modality pairings. The effect exerted by both the spatial arrangement of stimuli and attention on temporal order judgments is described. Moreover, a number of audiotactile interactions occurring during sensory-motor synchronization are highlighted. We also look at the audiotactile perception of rhythm and how it may be affected by musical training. The differences emerging from this body of research highlight the need for more extensive investigation into audiotactile temporal interactions. We conclude with a brief overview of some of the key issues deserving of further research in this area.