Literature DB >> 1745589

Similarity of tactual and visual picture recognition with limited field of view.

J M Loomis1, R L Klatzky, S J Lederman.   

Abstract

Subjects attempted to recognize simple line drawings of common objects using either touch or vision. In the touch condition, subjects explored raised line drawings using the distal pad of the index finger or the distal pads both of the index and of the middle fingers. In the visual condition, a computer-driven display was used to simulate tactual exploration. By moving an electronic pen over a digitizing tablet, the subject could explore a line drawing stored in memory; on the display screen a portion of the drawing appeared to move behind a stationary aperture, in concert with the movement of the pen. This aperture was varied in width, thus simulating the use of one or two fingers. In terms of average recognition accuracy and average response latency, recognition performance was virtually the same in the one-finger touch condition and the simulated one-finger vision condition. Visual recognition performance improved considerably when the visual field size was doubled (simulating two fingers), but tactual performance showed little improvement, suggesting that the effective tactual field of view for this task is approximately equal to one finger pad. This latter result agrees with other reports in the literature indicating that integration of two-dimensional pattern information extending over multiple fingers on the same hand is quite poor. The near equivalence of tactual picture perception and narrow-field vision suggests that the difficulties of tactual picture recognition must be largely due to the narrowness of the effective field of view.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1745589     DOI: 10.1068/p200167

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perception        ISSN: 0301-0066            Impact factor:   1.490


  25 in total

Review 1.  Tactual perception: a review of experimental variables and procedures.

Authors:  Alexandra M Fernandes; Pedro B Albuquerque
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2012-06-06

2.  Categorizing natural objects: a comparison of the visual and the haptic modalities.

Authors:  Nina Gaissert; Christian Wallraven
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2011-11-03       Impact factor: 1.972

Review 3.  Haptic object perception: spatial dimensionality and relation to vision.

Authors:  Roberta L Klatzky; Susan J Lederman
Journal:  Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 6.237

4.  Electrotactile perception of scatterplots on the fingertips and abdomen.

Authors:  S J Haase; K A Kaczmarek
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 2.602

5.  Visual mediation and the haptic recognition of two-dimensional pictures of common objects.

Authors:  S J Lederman; R L Klatzky; C Chataway; C D Summers
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1990-01

6.  Visualizing 3D objects from 2D cross sectional images displayed in-situ versus ex-situ.

Authors:  Bing Wu; Roberta L Klatzky; George Stetten
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Appl       Date:  2010-03

7.  Haptic identification of raised-line drawings: high visuospatial imagers outperform low visuospatial imagers.

Authors:  Samuel Lebaz; Christophe Jouffrais; Delphine Picard
Journal:  Psychol Res       Date:  2011-06-22

8.  Haptic guidance of overt visual attention.

Authors:  Alexandra List; Lucica Iordanescu; Marcia Grabowecky; Satoru Suzuki
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2014-11       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Differential modulation of corticospinal excitability during haptic sensing of 2-D patterns vs. textures.

Authors:  Sabah Master; François Tremblay
Journal:  BMC Neurosci       Date:  2010-11-25       Impact factor: 3.288

10.  Size-sensitive perceptual representations underlie visual and haptic object recognition.

Authors:  Matt Craddock; Rebecca Lawson
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2009-11-24       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.