Haptic subitizing across the fingers

Numerosity judgments of small sets of items (≤ 3) are generally fast and errorfree, while response times and error rates increase rapidly for larger numbers of items. We investigated an efficient process used for judging small numbers of items (known as subitizing) in active touch. We hypothesized that this efficient process for numerosity judgment might be related to stimulus properties that allow for efficient (parallel) search. Our results showed that subitizing was not possible forraised lines among flat surfaces, whereas this type of stimulus could be detected in parallel over the fingers. However, subitizing was possible when the number of fingers touching a surface had to be judged while the other fingers were lowered in mid-air. In the latter case, the lack of tactile input is essential, since subitizing was not enabled by differences in proprioceptive information from the fingers. Our results show that subitizing using haptic information from the fingers is possible only whensome fingers receive tactile information while other fingers do not

The effect of feature saliency on haptic subitizing

‘Subitizing’ refers to fast and error-free numerosity judgment for small (<4) sets of items. For larger sets, the slower process of ‘counting’ is used. Counting has a serial character, whereas subitizing is believed to have a parallel character. While subitizing was initially found in vision, it has been shown to exist in touch as well. In vision, it has been demonstrated that adding distractor items to a set of target items influences numerosity judgment of the target items. Subitizing was in this case only possible if the distractor item is highly salient among the targets. In the present study, we investigated the effect of adding a distractor item on haptic judgement of a set of target items. To this end, we asked subjects to judge the number of spheres grasped in their hand. Either a cube or an ellipsoid could be added to the set. A cube among spheres has been shown to be highly salient, while an ellipsoid among spheres is not. Our results show that adding a distractor item led to an increase in the response time slopes regardless of the distractor shape. Subitizing was, however, only possible in the case of a salient distractor. This is in agreement with results from vision

Representing numerosity through vibration patterns

It can be useful to display information about numerosity haptically. For instance, to display the time of day or distances when visual or auditory feedback is not possible or desirable. Here, we investigated the possibility of displaying numerosity information by means of a sequence of vibration pulses. From previous studies on numerosity perception in vision, haptics and audition it is known that numerosity judgment can be facilitated by grouping. Therefore, we investigated whether perception of the number of vibration pulses in a sequence can be facilitated by temporally grouping the pulses. We found that indeed temporal grouping can lead to considerably smaller errors and lower error rates indicating that this facilitated the task, but only when participants knew in advance whether the pulses would be temporally grouped. When grouped and ungrouped series of pulses were presented randomly interleaved, there was no difference in performance. This means that temporally grouping vibration sequences can allow the sequence to be displayed at a faster rate while it remains possible to perceive the number of vibration pulses accurately if the users is aware of the temporal grouping

Smooth at one end and rough at the other: influence of object texture on grasping behaviour

When picking up objects using a pinch grip, there are usually numerous places at which one could place the thumb and index finger. Yet, people seem to consistently place them at or close to the centre of mass (COM), presumably to minimize torque and therefore the required grip force. People also prefer to grasp objects by parallel surfaces and ones with higher friction coefficients (rough surfaces), to prevent the object from slipping when they lift it. Here, we examine the trade-off between friction and COM. Participants were asked to grasp and lift aluminium bars of which one end was polished and therefore smooth and the other was rough. Their finger positions were recorded to determine how they grasped the objects. The bars were oriented horizontally in the frontal plane, with the centre aligned with the participants’ body midline. The bars varied in the horizontal offset between the COM and the edge of the rough region. The offset could be 0, 1 or 2 cm. We expected participants to grasp closer to the rough area than the centre of the bar. Completely rough bars and completely smooth bars served as control conditions. The slipperiness of the surface that was grasped affected the height of the grasping points, indicating that participants adjusted their grasping behaviour to the slipperiness of the surface. However, the tendency to grasp closer to the rough area was minimal. This shows that the judged COM largely determines how an object is grasped. Friction has very limited influence

Smooth at one end and rough at the other: influence of object texture on grasping behaviour

© 2017, Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany. When picking up objects using a pinch grip, there are usually numerous places at which one could place the thumb and index finger. Yet, people seem to consistently place them at or close to the centre of mass (COM), presumably to minimize torque and therefore the required grip force. People also prefer to grasp objects by parallel surfaces and ones with higher friction coefficients (rough surfaces), to prevent the object from slipping when they lift it. Here, we examine the trade-off between friction and COM. Participants were asked to grasp and lift aluminium bars of which one end was polished and therefore smooth and the other was rough. Their finger positions were recorded to determine how they grasped the objects. The bars were oriented horizontally in the frontal plane, with the centre aligned with the participants’ body midline. The bars varied in the horizontal offset between the COM and the edge of the rough region. The offset could be 0, 1 or 2 cm. We expected participants to grasp closer to the rough area than the centre of the bar. Completely rough bars and completely smooth bars served as control conditions. The slipperiness of the surface that was grasped affected the height of the grasping points, indicating that participants adjusted their grasping behaviour to the slipperiness of the surface. However, the tendency to grasp closer to the rough area was minimal. This shows that the judged COM largely determines how an object is grasped. Friction has very limited influence

Haptic pop-out of movable stimuli

When, in visual and haptic search, a target is easily found among distractors, this is called a pop-out effect. The target feature is then believed to be salient, and the search is performed in a parallel way. We investigated this effect with movable stimuli in a haptic search task. The task was to find a movable ball among anchored distractors or the other way round. Results show that reaction times were independent of the number of distractors if the movable ball was the target but increased with the number of items if the anchored ball was the target. Analysis of hand movements revealed a parallel search strategy, shorter movement paths, a higher average movement speed, and a narrower direction distribution with the movable target, as compared with a more detailed search for an anchored target. Taken together, these results show that a movable object pops out between anchored objects and this indicates that movability is a salient object feature. Vibratory signals resulting from the movable ball were found to be a reasonable explanation regarding the sensation responsible for the pop-out of movability

Integration and disruption effects of shape and texture in haptic search

In a search task, where one has to search for the presence of a target among distractors, the target is sometimes easily found, whereas in other searches it is much harder to find. The performance in a search task is influenced by the identity of the target, the identity of the distractors and the differences between the two. In this study, these factors were manipulated by varying the target and distractors in shape (cube or sphere) and roughness (rough or smooth) in a haptic search task. Participants had to grasp a bundle of items and determine as fast as possible whether a predefined target was present or not. It was found that roughness and edges were relatively salient features and the search for the presence of these features was faster than for their absence. If the task was easy, the addition of these features could also disrupt performance, even if they were irrelevant for the search task. Another important finding was that the search for a target that differed in two properties from the distractors was faster than a task with only a single property difference, although this was only found if the two target properties were non-salient. This means that shape and texture can be effectively integrated. Finally, it was found that edges are more beneficial to a search task than disrupting, whereas for roughness this was the other way round

Haptic spatial configuration learning in deaf and hearing individuals

The present study investigated haptic spatial configuration learning in deaf individuals, hearing sign language interpreters and hearing controls. In three trials, participants had to match ten shapes haptically to the cut-outs in a board as fast as possible. Deaf and hearing sign language users outperformed the hearing controls. A similar difference was observed for a rotated version of the board. The groups did not differ, however, on a free relocation trial. Though a significant sign language experience advantage was observed, comparison to results from a previous study testing the same task in a group of blind individuals showed it to be smaller than the advantage observed for the blind group. These results are discussed in terms of how sign language experience and sensory deprivation benefit haptic spatial configuration processing

Grabbing subitizing with both hands: bimanual number processing

Visual judgment of small numerosities (<4) is generally assumed to be done through subitizing, which is a faster process than counting. Subitizing has also been shown to occur in haptic judgment of the number of spheres in the hand. Furthermore, interactions have been shown to exist between visually perceived numbers and hand motor action. In this study, we compare enumeration of a set of spheres presented to one hand (unimanual) and enumeration of the same total number of spheres presented divided over the two hands (bimanual). Our results show that, like in vision, a combination of subitizing and counting is used to process numbers in active touch. This shows that numbers are processed in a modality-independent way. This suggests that there are not only interactions between perception of numbers and hand motor action, but rather that number representation is modality-independent