Numerosity discrimination of tactile stimuli.

The ability of 40 college students to discriminate the number of tactile stimuli presented simultaneously was measured in two experiments. Simulation was provided by 12 solenoids fixed to points on the arms and legs. Exp. I showed a mean correct discrimination level of between 1.55 and 2.10 solenoids. Exp II compared discrimination of numerosity by a group who received immediate feedback with a no-feedback control group. Feedback produced a small increase in this ability. However, the most stimulation points correctly discriminated did not exceed three. The data are discussed in terms of the possible role of cutaneous masking.     

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.     

Difference threshold for intensity of tactile stimuli

The difference threshold (DL) for brief tactile stimuli (taps) and vibrotactile stimuli was determined using a 2IFC procedure. The measurements were made at several intensities both in quiet and in the presence of a background vibration. The results show that in the absence of background vibration the DLs for higher intensity stimuli are similar for both taps and vibration, whereas at lower intensities the DL is larger for taps. In the presence of background vibration the DL for vibratory stimuli is elevated to a much greater extent than it is for tap stimuli. The DL is affected by both the intensity of the signal and the intensity of the background vibration.     

Task-irrelevant sounds influence both temporal order and apparent-motion judgments about tactile stimuli applied to crossed and uncrossed hands

It has been suggested that judgments about the temporal–spatial order of successive tactile stimuli depend on the perceived direction of apparent motion between them. Here we manipulated tactile apparent-motion percepts by presenting a brief, task-irrelevant auditory stimulus temporally in-between pairs of tactile stimuli. The tactile stimuli were applied one to each hand, with varying stimulus onset asynchronies (SOAs). Participants reported the location of the first stimulus (temporal order judgments: TOJs) while adopting both crossed and uncrossed hand postures, so we could scrutinize skin-based, anatomical, and external reference frames. With crossed hands, the sound improved TOJ performance at short (≤300 ms) and at long (>300 ms) SOAs. When the hands were uncrossed, the sound induced a decrease in TOJ performance, but only at short SOAs. A second experiment confirmed that the auditory stimulus indeed modulated tactile apparent motion perception under these conditions. Perceived apparent motion directions were more ambiguous with crossed than with uncrossed hands, probably indicating competing spatial codes in the crossed posture. However, irrespective of posture, the additional sound tended to impair potentially anatomically coded motion direction discrimination at a short SOA of 80 ms, but it significantly enhanced externally coded apparent motion perception at a long SOA of 500 ms. Anatomically coded motion signals imply incorrect TOJ responses with crossed hands, but correct responses when the hands are uncrossed; externally coded motion signals always point toward the correct TOJ response. Thus, taken together, these results suggest that apparent-motion signals are likely taken into account when tactile temporal–spatial information is reconstructed.

     

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.     

On the short-term retention of serial,tactile stimuli

In three experiments using the short-term memory distractor paradigm, Ss attempted to remember which three or four phalanges of the left hand had been stimulated and in what order. The experiments showed that forgetting increased as a function of trials, that such proactive effects could be eliminated by separating the successive trials by several minutes, that both verbal and nonverbal distractor tasks impaired retention, and that forgetting reached a maximum in approximately 6 sec. All of these results concur with those generally obtained for the short-term retention of verbal material. In addition, it was shown that the tactile recall was significantly poorer after an arithmetic distractor task presented visually than after the same task presented aurally. This result suggests an overlap between the mechanisms of tactile retention and the mechanisms of vision.     

Temporal-order judgments and reaction time for stimuli of different modalities

Summary Reaction times and the relative latency evaluated by the temporal-order-judgment method for two stimuli of different modalities (visual and auditory) were measured. The difference between reaction times for visual and auditory stimuli was about 40 ms. The relative latency was slightly shorter, however; in conflict with Rutschmann and Link's (1964) previous result, the auditory stimulus must be delayed to be perceived simultaneously with the visual one.     

Seeing the body distorts tactile size perception

Vision of the body modulates somatosensation, even when entirely non-informative about stimulation. For example, seeing the body increases tactile spatial acuity, but reduces acute pain. While previous results demonstrate that vision of the body modulates somatosensory sensitivity, it is unknown whether vision also affects metric properties of touch, and if so how. This study investigated how non-informative vision of the body modulates tactile size perception. We used the mirror box illusion to induce the illusion that participants were directly seeing their stimulated left hand, though they actually saw their reflected right hand. We manipulated whether participants: (a) had the illusion of directly seeing their stimulated left hand, (b) had the illusion of seeing a non-body object at the same location, or (c) looked directly at their non-stimulated right-hand. Participants made verbal estimates of the perceived distance between two tactile stimuli presented simultaneously to the dorsum of the left hand, either 20, 30, or 40 mm apart. Vision of the body significantly reduced the perceived size of touch, compared to vision of the object or of the contralateral hand. In contrast, no apparent changes of perceived hand size were found. These results show that seeing the body distorts tactile size perception.     

The crossed-hands deficit in tactile temporal-order judgments: the effect of training

Several recent studies have shown that judgments of temporal order for tactile stimuli presented to the two hands are greatly affected by crossing the hands. The size of the threshold for judging temporal order may be up to four times larger with the hands crossed as compared to the hands uncrossed. The results from these recent studies suggest that with crossed hands, contrary to many situations involving the integration of tactile and proprioceptive information, subjects have difficulty in adjusting their perception of tactile inputs to correspond with the spatial positions of the hands. In the present study we examined the effect of training in judging temporal order on the size of this crossed-hands deficit--the difference in the thresholds for temporal-order judgments when the hands are crossed and uncrossed. All training procedures produced significant declines in the size of the deficit. With training, the difference between crossed-hands and uncrossed-hands temporal-order thresholds dropped from several hundred milliseconds to as little as 19 ms. A group of percussionists with experience in playing with crossed hands showed the same crossed-hands effects as non-musicians. The results were consistent in showing that the crossed-hands deficit was never completely eliminated but was greatly reduced with training. The implication is that subjects are able to adjust to the crossed-hands posture with modest amounts of training. The results are discussed in terms of the explanations that have been offered for the crossed-hands deficit.     

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.     

Report on blind subjects' tactile and auditory recognition for environmental stimuli.

In two related experiments on recognition-on touch and audition-accuracy rates were obtained from congenitally blind subjects and compared with those for normally sighted subjects. In Exp. 1, 5 blind subjects inspected, i.e., handled, 150 common objects and were tested after a delay of 7 days. In Exp. 2, 9 blind subjects listened to 194 naturalistic sounds and were also tested after a 7-day delay. Accuracy of tactile recognition for the blind was 89.4% while it was 87.9% for the normally sighted. Sound recognition by blind subjects was 76.6% and for the normally sighted it was 78.4%. Neither difference was statistically significant.     

Internal versus external references with respect to perception of stimuli on the body surface

Previous studies on the determinants of locus of perception of stimuli on the body have suggested that the position of the stimulus has a significant effect whether a subject perceives a tactile pattern as seen from inside or outside the body. However, it is possible that previous investigators confounded stimulus location--dorsal or frontal--and experimenter's position--behind or in front of the subject. Using 42 male subjects in a 2 X 2 design, the effects of experimenter's position and stimulus location were studied by a new technique for inferring locus of perception. Experimenter's position, rather than stimulus location, affects subjects' locus of perception. Perception of stimuli on the body involves three independent factors, the demand characteristics of the experiment, the manner in which an individual perceives the boundaries of his own body, and an individual's ability to adopt the experimenter's perceptual standpoint.     

Comparison of accuracy in auditory and tactile recognition memory for environmental stimuli.

Accuracy rates for auditory and tactile recognition of naturalistic stimuli over a 7-day period are compared. 40 subjects listened to 50, 107, or 194 naturalistic sounds and were tested immediately or after delays of 2 or 7 days. 30 other subjects handled but did not visually inspect 150 common objects and were tested over the same three delay intervals. Recognition accuracy for sounds was 87.5%, 82.5%, and 80.4% while common objects were recognized at 96.0%, 93.8%, and 88.5% rates of accuracy. Tactile recognition memory was superior to auditory recognition memory. The recognition accuracies of both modalities were affected by the delay interval. The number of items inspected had no effect on the recognition memory for sounds. Following a delay of 1 wk., the accuracy of recognition relative to the original level of function was 92% for both modalities.     

Auditory, tactile, and multisensory cues facilitate search for dynamic visual stimuli

Presenting an auditory or tactile cue in temporal synchrony with a change in the color of a visual target can facilitate participants’ visual search performance. In the present study, we compared the magnitude of unimodal auditory, vibrotactile, and bimodal (i.e., multisensory) cuing benefits when the nonvisual cues were presented in temporal synchrony with the changing of the target’s color (Experiments 1 and 2). The target (a horizontal or vertical line segment) was presented among a number of distractors (tilted line segments) that also changed color at various times. In Experiments 3 and 4, the cues were also made spatially informative with regard to the location of the visual target. The unimodal and bimodal cues gave rise to an equivalent (significant) facilitation of participants’ visual search performance relative to a no-cue baseline condition. Making the unimodal auditory and vibrotactile cues spatially informative produced further performance improvements (on validly cued trials), as compared with cues that were spatially uninformative or otherwise spatially invalid. A final experiment was conducted in order to determine whether cue location (close to versus far from the visual display) would influence participants’ visual search performance. Auditory cues presented close to the visual search display were found to produce significantly better performance than cues presented over headphones. Taken together, these results have implications for the design of nonvisual and multisensory warning signals used in complex visual displays.     

RT to tactile stimuli presented ipsi- and contralaterally to the responding hand

Subjects had to react with the hand which received a tactile stimulus (uncrossed condition) or with the hand opposite to the hand which received the stimulus (crossed condition). Four experiments were conducted. In the first three, subjects knew which hand would receive the stimulus and which hand would have to respond. In the first two experiments, subjects reacted to a simple tactile stimulus while in the third subjects had to perform a tactile discrimination before responding. No significant differences in RT under the crossed and uncrossed conditions were observed in the first three experiments. In the fourth experiment, subjects did not know which hand would receive the stimulus, and they also did not know which hand would have to respond. Under these conditions, large significant differences in RT between the crossed and uncrossed condition emerged.

The study includes a criticism of a simple structural interpretation of interhemispheric transmission time (IHTT) as proposed by Bashore (1981). Support is provided for the view that in paradigms of the kind used here, allocation of attention to a psychologically defined hemispace is a more important factor in observed RT than structural links between stimulus and response mechanisms.     

The effect of spatial orientation on the perception of moving tactile stimuli

Previous studies have shown that the perception of spatial patterns, such as letters, presented to the hand is affected by the spatial orientation of the hand. The present study investigated how the perception of direction of motion across the fingerpads changes with the position of the hand in space. The moving stimuli were generated on two displays. In one condition, the displays were placed horizontally in front of the subject, with the subject’s thumb (target site) and index finger (nontarget site) placed flat on the displays. In a second condition, the displays were vertically oriented and gripped between the thumb and index finger. Using a selective-attention paradigm in which subjects are instructed to respond only to the direction of motion at the target site, performance was still affected by the direction of motion at the nontarget site. Changing the orientation of the displays changed the effectiveness of the nontarget in interfering with the identification of the target movement. Nontarget stimuli that produced no interference in the horizontal orientation did so in the vertical, and vice versa. It appears that subjects are not using the local direction of movement across the fingerpads to judge the relative direction of movement at the two sites; rather, they are using the external direction of movement.     

Conflicts as aversive signals: Conflict priming increases negative judgments for neutral stimuli

Botvinick, Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 7:356–366 (2007) recently suggested that competing theories of the monitoring function of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) for cognitive control might converge on the detection of aversive signals in general, implying that response conflicts, a known trigger of ACC activation, are aversive, too. Recent evidence showing conflict priming (i.e., faster responses to negative targets after conflict primes) directly supports this notion but remains inconclusive with regard to possible confounds with processing fluency. To this end, two experiments were conducted to offer more compelling evidence for the negative valence of conflicts. Participants were primed by (conflict and nonconflict) Stroop stimuli and subsequently had to judge the valence of neutral German words (Experiment 1a) or Chinese pictographs (Experiment 1b). Results showed that conflict, as compared with nonconflict, primes led to more negative judgments of subsequently presented neutral target stimuli. The findings will be discussed in the light of existing theories of action control highlighting the role of aversive signals for sequential processing adjustments.