Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy
Identifieur interne : 000B69 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000B68; suivant : 000B70Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy
Auteurs : Myriam Levy ; Stéphanie Bourgeon ; C. Elaine ChapmanSource :
- Experimental brain research [ 0014-4819 ] ; 2007.
Descripteurs français
- Pascal (Inist)
English descriptors
- KwdEn :
Abstract
The aim of this study was to define the relative contribution of self-generated cutaneous and proprioceptive feedback to haptic shape discrimination by systematically constraining the exploratory strategy. Subjects (n = 23) explored pairs of two-dimensional (2-D) angles (standard angle, 90°; comparison angles, 91°-103°) placed at arm's length from the subject, and identified the larger angle of each pair. The exploratory strategies included a reference condition, dynamic scan of the index finger over the entire object [combined cutaneous and proprioceptive (shoulder) feedback], and modified conditions, static touch of the intersection of the two bars that formed the angle using the index finger (cutaneous feedback) and dynamic scans of the object using a hand-held tool (proprioceptive feedback, shoulder). Discrimination thresholds (75% correct) were very similar for dynamic and static touch with the index finger. Thresholds varied as a function of the static contact duration (<1 s, 7.2° ± 0.6°; ∼3 s, 4.2° ± 0.5°), but were not different from the reference condition (6.0° ± 0.9°). The higher threshold with short static touch likely reflects movement-related gating of self-generated tactile inputs. Together, the results suggested that cutaneous feedback alone may be sufficient to explain 2-D angle discrimination, because the added proprioceptive feedback did not improve performance. Also, threshold did not vary with the number of dynamic scans (one or two), suggesting that the critical information was gathered on the first pass over the angle. In contrast, when the angles were explored with the tool, the threshold increased relative to the corresponding reference condition from the same session (tool, 9.6° ± 0.9°; dynamic scan with the finger, 6.2° ± 1.0°). Thus, performance was poorer with proprioceptive feedback alone, suggesting that cutaneous feedback was relatively more important for 2-D haptic angle discrimination in the present experiment.
Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)
Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.
| pA |
|
|---|
Format Inist (serveur)
| NO : | PASCAL 07-0194036 INIST |
|---|---|
| ET : | Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy |
| AU : | LEVY (Myriam); BOURGEON (Stéphanie); CHAPMAN (C. Elaine) |
| AF : | Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128/Montréal, QC H3C 3J7/Canada (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut.) |
| DT : | Publication en série; Niveau analytique |
| SO : | Experimental brain research; ISSN 0014-4819; Coden EXBRAP; Allemagne; Da. 2007; Vol. 178; No. 2; Pp. 240-251; Bibl. 3/4 p. |
| LA : | Anglais |
| EA : | The aim of this study was to define the relative contribution of self-generated cutaneous and proprioceptive feedback to haptic shape discrimination by systematically constraining the exploratory strategy. Subjects (n = 23) explored pairs of two-dimensional (2-D) angles (standard angle, 90°; comparison angles, 91°-103°) placed at arm's length from the subject, and identified the larger angle of each pair. The exploratory strategies included a reference condition, dynamic scan of the index finger over the entire object [combined cutaneous and proprioceptive (shoulder) feedback], and modified conditions, static touch of the intersection of the two bars that formed the angle using the index finger (cutaneous feedback) and dynamic scans of the object using a hand-held tool (proprioceptive feedback, shoulder). Discrimination thresholds (75% correct) were very similar for dynamic and static touch with the index finger. Thresholds varied as a function of the static contact duration (<1 s, 7.2° ± 0.6°; ∼3 s, 4.2° ± 0.5°), but were not different from the reference condition (6.0° ± 0.9°). The higher threshold with short static touch likely reflects movement-related gating of self-generated tactile inputs. Together, the results suggested that cutaneous feedback alone may be sufficient to explain 2-D angle discrimination, because the added proprioceptive feedback did not improve performance. Also, threshold did not vary with the number of dynamic scans (one or two), suggesting that the critical information was gathered on the first pass over the angle. In contrast, when the angles were explored with the tool, the threshold increased relative to the corresponding reference condition from the same session (tool, 9.6° ± 0.9°; dynamic scan with the finger, 6.2° ± 1.0°). Thus, performance was poorer with proprioceptive feedback alone, suggesting that cutaneous feedback was relatively more important for 2-D haptic angle discrimination in the present experiment. |
| CC : | 002B09K; 002A25F |
| FD : | Stratégie; Proprioception; Epaule; Main; Gating; Homme; Perception haptique |
| ED : | Strategy; Proprioception; Shoulder; Hand; Gating; Human; Haptic perception |
| SD : | Estrategia; Propiocepción; Hombro; Mano; Gating; Hombre |
| LO : | INIST-12535.354000145726490090 |
| ID : | 07-0194036 |
Links to Exploration step
Pascal:07-0194036Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy</title><author><name sortKey="Levy, Myriam" sort="Levy, Myriam" uniqKey="Levy M" first="Myriam" last="Levy">Myriam Levy</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bourgeon, Stephanie" sort="Bourgeon, Stephanie" uniqKey="Bourgeon S" first="Stéphanie" last="Bourgeon">Stéphanie Bourgeon</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chapman, C Elaine" sort="Chapman, C Elaine" uniqKey="Chapman C" first="C. Elaine" last="Chapman">C. Elaine Chapman</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno><idno type="inist">07-0194036</idno><date when="2007">2007</date><idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 07-0194036 INIST</idno><idno type="RBID">Pascal:07-0194036</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000B69</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy</title><author><name sortKey="Levy, Myriam" sort="Levy, Myriam" uniqKey="Levy M" first="Myriam" last="Levy">Myriam Levy</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Bourgeon, Stephanie" sort="Bourgeon, Stephanie" uniqKey="Bourgeon S" first="Stéphanie" last="Bourgeon">Stéphanie Bourgeon</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Chapman, C Elaine" sort="Chapman, C Elaine" uniqKey="Chapman C" first="C. Elaine" last="Chapman">C. Elaine Chapman</name><affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></inist:fA14></affiliation></author></analytic><series><title level="j" type="main">Experimental brain research</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">Exp. brain res.</title><idno type="ISSN">0014-4819</idno><imprint><date when="2007">2007</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Experimental brain research</title><title level="j" type="abbreviated">Exp. brain res.</title><idno type="ISSN">0014-4819</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Gating</term><term>Hand</term><term>Haptic perception</term><term>Human</term><term>Proprioception</term><term>Shoulder</term><term>Strategy</term></keywords><keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Stratégie</term><term>Proprioception</term><term>Epaule</term><term>Main</term><term>Gating</term><term>Homme</term><term>Perception haptique</term></keywords></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">The aim of this study was to define the relative contribution of self-generated cutaneous and proprioceptive feedback to haptic shape discrimination by systematically constraining the exploratory strategy. Subjects (n = 23) explored pairs of two-dimensional (2-D) angles (standard angle, 90°; comparison angles, 91°-103°) placed at arm's length from the subject, and identified the larger angle of each pair. The exploratory strategies included a reference condition, dynamic scan of the index finger over the entire object [combined cutaneous and proprioceptive (shoulder) feedback], and modified conditions, static touch of the intersection of the two bars that formed the angle using the index finger (cutaneous feedback) and dynamic scans of the object using a hand-held tool (proprioceptive feedback, shoulder). Discrimination thresholds (75% correct) were very similar for dynamic and static touch with the index finger. Thresholds varied as a function of the static contact duration (<1 s, 7.2° ± 0.6°; <sup>∼</sup>3 s, 4.2° ± 0.5°), but were not different from the reference condition (6.0° ± 0.9°). The higher threshold with short static touch likely reflects movement-related gating of self-generated tactile inputs. Together, the results suggested that cutaneous feedback alone may be sufficient to explain 2-D angle discrimination, because the added proprioceptive feedback did not improve performance. Also, threshold did not vary with the number of dynamic scans (one or two), suggesting that the critical information was gathered on the first pass over the angle. In contrast, when the angles were explored with the tool, the threshold increased relative to the corresponding reference condition from the same session (tool, 9.6° ± 0.9°; dynamic scan with the finger, 6.2° ± 1.0°). Thus, performance was poorer with proprioceptive feedback alone, suggesting that cutaneous feedback was relatively more important for 2-D haptic angle discrimination in the present experiment.</div></front></TEI><inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0014-4819</s0></fA01><fA02 i1="01"><s0>EXBRAP</s0></fA02><fA03 i2="1"><s0>Exp. brain res.</s0></fA03><fA05><s2>178</s2></fA05><fA06><s2>2</s2></fA06><fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy</s1></fA08><fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>LEVY (Myriam)</s1></fA11><fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>BOURGEON (Stéphanie)</s1></fA11><fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>CHAPMAN (C. Elaine)</s1></fA11><fA14 i1="01"><s1>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128</s1><s2>Montréal, QC H3C 3J7</s2><s3>CAN</s3><sZ>1 aut.</sZ><sZ>2 aut.</sZ><sZ>3 aut.</sZ></fA14><fA20><s1>240-251</s1></fA20><fA21><s1>2007</s1></fA21><fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0></fA23><fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1><s2>12535</s2><s5>354000145726490090</s5></fA43><fA44><s0>0000</s0><s1>© 2007 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1></fA44><fA45><s0>3/4 p.</s0></fA45><fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>07-0194036</s0></fA47><fA60><s1>P</s1></fA60><fA61><s0>A</s0></fA61><fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Experimental brain research</s0></fA64><fA66 i1="01"><s0>DEU</s0></fA66><fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>The aim of this study was to define the relative contribution of self-generated cutaneous and proprioceptive feedback to haptic shape discrimination by systematically constraining the exploratory strategy. Subjects (n = 23) explored pairs of two-dimensional (2-D) angles (standard angle, 90°; comparison angles, 91°-103°) placed at arm's length from the subject, and identified the larger angle of each pair. The exploratory strategies included a reference condition, dynamic scan of the index finger over the entire object [combined cutaneous and proprioceptive (shoulder) feedback], and modified conditions, static touch of the intersection of the two bars that formed the angle using the index finger (cutaneous feedback) and dynamic scans of the object using a hand-held tool (proprioceptive feedback, shoulder). Discrimination thresholds (75% correct) were very similar for dynamic and static touch with the index finger. Thresholds varied as a function of the static contact duration (<1 s, 7.2° ± 0.6°; <sup>∼</sup>3 s, 4.2° ± 0.5°), but were not different from the reference condition (6.0° ± 0.9°). The higher threshold with short static touch likely reflects movement-related gating of self-generated tactile inputs. Together, the results suggested that cutaneous feedback alone may be sufficient to explain 2-D angle discrimination, because the added proprioceptive feedback did not improve performance. Also, threshold did not vary with the number of dynamic scans (one or two), suggesting that the critical information was gathered on the first pass over the angle. In contrast, when the angles were explored with the tool, the threshold increased relative to the corresponding reference condition from the same session (tool, 9.6° ± 0.9°; dynamic scan with the finger, 6.2° ± 1.0°). Thus, performance was poorer with proprioceptive feedback alone, suggesting that cutaneous feedback was relatively more important for 2-D haptic angle discrimination in the present experiment.</s0></fC01><fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002B09K</s0></fC02><fC02 i1="02" i2="X"><s0>002A25F</s0></fC02><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Stratégie</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Strategy</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estrategia</s0><s5>01</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Proprioception</s0><s5>02</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Proprioception</s0><s5>02</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Propiocepción</s0><s5>02</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Epaule</s0><s5>03</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Shoulder</s0><s5>03</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombro</s0><s5>03</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Main</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Hand</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Mano</s0><s5>04</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Gating</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Gating</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Gating</s0><s5>05</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Homme</s0><s5>54</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Human</s0><s5>54</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="06" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombre</s0><s5>54</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Perception haptique</s0><s4>CD</s4><s5>96</s5></fC03><fC03 i1="07" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Haptic perception</s0><s4>CD</s4><s5>96</s5></fC03><fN21><s1>128</s1></fN21><fN44 i1="01"><s1>OTO</s1></fN44><fN82><s1>OTO</s1></fN82></pA></standard><server><NO>PASCAL 07-0194036 INIST</NO><ET>Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy</ET><AU>LEVY (Myriam); BOURGEON (Stéphanie); CHAPMAN (C. Elaine)</AU><AF>Groupe de recherche sur le système nerveux central, Département de physiologie, Faculté de Médecine, Université de Montréal, Station Centre Ville, PO Box 6128/Montréal, QC H3C 3J7/Canada (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut.)</AF><DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT><SO>Experimental brain research; ISSN 0014-4819; Coden EXBRAP; Allemagne; Da. 2007; Vol. 178; No. 2; Pp. 240-251; Bibl. 3/4 p.</SO><LA>Anglais</LA><EA>The aim of this study was to define the relative contribution of self-generated cutaneous and proprioceptive feedback to haptic shape discrimination by systematically constraining the exploratory strategy. Subjects (n = 23) explored pairs of two-dimensional (2-D) angles (standard angle, 90°; comparison angles, 91°-103°) placed at arm's length from the subject, and identified the larger angle of each pair. The exploratory strategies included a reference condition, dynamic scan of the index finger over the entire object [combined cutaneous and proprioceptive (shoulder) feedback], and modified conditions, static touch of the intersection of the two bars that formed the angle using the index finger (cutaneous feedback) and dynamic scans of the object using a hand-held tool (proprioceptive feedback, shoulder). Discrimination thresholds (75% correct) were very similar for dynamic and static touch with the index finger. Thresholds varied as a function of the static contact duration (<1 s, 7.2° ± 0.6°; <sup>∼</sup>3 s, 4.2° ± 0.5°), but were not different from the reference condition (6.0° ± 0.9°). The higher threshold with short static touch likely reflects movement-related gating of self-generated tactile inputs. Together, the results suggested that cutaneous feedback alone may be sufficient to explain 2-D angle discrimination, because the added proprioceptive feedback did not improve performance. Also, threshold did not vary with the number of dynamic scans (one or two), suggesting that the critical information was gathered on the first pass over the angle. In contrast, when the angles were explored with the tool, the threshold increased relative to the corresponding reference condition from the same session (tool, 9.6° ± 0.9°; dynamic scan with the finger, 6.2° ± 1.0°). Thus, performance was poorer with proprioceptive feedback alone, suggesting that cutaneous feedback was relatively more important for 2-D haptic angle discrimination in the present experiment.</EA><CC>002B09K; 002A25F</CC><FD>Stratégie; Proprioception; Epaule; Main; Gating; Homme; Perception haptique</FD><ED>Strategy; Proprioception; Shoulder; Hand; Gating; Human; Haptic perception</ED><SD>Estrategia; Propiocepción; Hombro; Mano; Gating; Hombre</SD><LO>INIST-12535.354000145726490090</LO><ID>07-0194036</ID></server></inist></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Ticri/CIDE/explor/HapticV1/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000B69 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000B69 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Ticri/CIDE
|area= HapticV1
|flux= PascalFrancis
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= Pascal:07-0194036
|texte= Haptic discrimination of two-dimensional angles : influence of exploratory strategy
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.23. |  |