Literature DB >> 17428754

Comparison of dynamic (effortful) touch by hand and foot.

Alen Hajnal1, Sergio Fonseca, Steven Harrison, Jeffrey Kinsella-Shaw, Claudia Carello.   

Abstract

Spatial perception by dynamic touch is a well-documented capability of the hand and arm. Morphological and physiological characteristics of the foot and leg suggest that such a capability may not generalize to that putatively less dexterous limb. The authors examined length perception by dynamic touch in a task in which weighted aluminum rods were grasped by the hand and wielded about the wrist or secured to the foot and wielded about the ankle. Participants' (N = 10) upper and lower extremities were comparable in terms of (a) the accuracy and consistency of length perception and (b) their sensitivity to manipulations of the moments of the mass distribution of the rods. The authors discuss those results in terms of the field-like structure of the haptic perceptual system, an organization that may underlie what appears to be functional, rather than anatomical, specificity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17428754     DOI: 10.3200/JMBR.39.2.82-88

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Mot Behav        ISSN: 0022-2895            Impact factor:   1.328


  12 in total

1.  Obtaining information by dynamic (effortful) touching.

Authors:  M T Turvey; Claudia Carello
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 6.237

2.  Evaluating the contributions of muscle activity and joint kinematics to weight perception across multiple joints.

Authors:  Morgan L Waddell; Eric L Amazeen
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-05-13       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Getting off on the right (or left) foot: perceiving by means of a rod attached to the preferred or non-preferred foot.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Wagman; Alen Hajnal
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 1.972

4.  Turning perception on its head: cephalic perception of whole and partial length of a wielded object.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Wagman; Matthew D Langley; Takahiro Higuchi
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2016-09-21       Impact factor: 1.972

5.  Location of a grasped object's effector influences perception of the length of that object via dynamic touch.

Authors:  Madhur Mangalam; James D Conners; Dorothy M Fragaszy; Karl M Newell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-05-14       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Temperature influences perception of the length of a wielded object via effortful touch.

Authors:  Madhur Mangalam; Jeffrey B Wagman; Karl M Newell
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2017-12-11       Impact factor: 1.972

7.  Nested prospectivity in perception: perceived maximum reaching height reflects anticipated changes in reaching ability.

Authors:  Jeffrey B Wagman; Lydia L Morgan
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2010-12

8.  Big people, little world: the body influences size perception.

Authors:  Jeanine K Stefanucci; Michael N Geuss
Journal:  Perception       Date:  2009       Impact factor: 1.490

9.  Application of the rubber hand illusion paradigm: comparison between upper and lower limbs.

Authors:  Mareike Flögel; Karl Theodor Kalveram; Oliver Christ; Joachim Vogt
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2015-02-06

10.  Somatosensory Perception of Running Shoe Mass may be influenced by Extended Wearing Time or Inclusion of a Personal Reference Shoe, Depending on Testing Method.

Authors:  James G Saxton; Benjamin R Mardis; Christopher L Kliethermes; David S Senchina
Journal:  Int J Exerc Sci       Date:  2020-02-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.