Literature DB >> 17562025

Haptic search with finger movements: using more fingers does not necessarily reduce search times.

K E Overvliet1, J B J Smeets, E Brenner.   

Abstract

Two haptic serial search tasks were used to investigate how the separations between items, and the number of fingers used to scan them, influence the search time and search strategy. In both tasks participants had to search for a target (cross) between a fixed number of non-targets (circles). The items were placed in a straight line. The target's position was varied within blocks, and inter-item separation was varied between blocks. In the first experiment participants used their index finger to scan the display. As expected, search time depended on target position as well as on item separation. For larger separations participants' movements were jerky, resembling 'saccades' and 'fixations', while for the shortest separation the movements were smooth. When only considering time in contact with an item, search times were the same for all separation conditions. Furthermore, participants never continued their movement after they encountered the target. These results suggest that participants did not use the time during which they were moving between the items to process information about the items. The search times were a little shorter than those in a static search experiment (Overvliet et al. in Percept Psychophys, 2007a), where multiple items were presented to the fingertips simultaneously. To investigate whether this is because the finger was moving or because only one finger was stimulated, we conducted a second experiment in which we asked participants to put three fingers in line and use them together to scan the items. Doing so increased the time in contact with the items for all separations, so search times were presumably longer in the static search experiment because multiple fingers were involved. This may be caused by the time that it takes to switch from one finger to the other.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17562025     DOI: 10.1007/s00221-007-0998-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Exp Brain Res        ISSN: 0014-4819            Impact factor:   1.972


  16 in total

1.  Similar mechanisms underlie curvature comparison by static and dynamic touch.

Authors:  S C Pont; A M Kappers; J J Koenderink
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1999-07

2.  Observations on active touch.

Authors:  J J GIBSON
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1962-11       Impact factor: 8.934

3.  Haptic processing of the location of a known property: does knowing what you've touched tell you where it is?

Authors:  Kimberly A Purdy; Susan J Lederman; Roberta L Klatzky
Journal:  Can J Exp Psychol       Date:  2004-03

4.  Relative availability of surface and object properties during early haptic processing.

Authors:  S J Lederman; R L Klatzky
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.332

5.  Control of fixation duration in a simple search task.

Authors:  I T Hooge; C J Erkelens
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1996-10

6.  Haptic processing of spatially distributed information.

Authors:  S J Lederman; R A Browse; R L Klatzky
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1988-09

7.  Identifying objects from a haptic glance.

Authors:  R L Klatzky; S J Lederman
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1995-11

8.  A comparison of visual and two modes of tactual letter resolution.

Authors:  J R Phillips; K O Johnson; H M Browne
Journal:  Percept Psychophys       Date:  1983-09

9.  Active and passive touch: the influence of exploration time on form recognition.

Authors:  M A Heller
Journal:  J Gen Psychol       Date:  1984-04

10.  Haptic search is more efficient when the stimulus can be interpreted as consisting of fewer items.

Authors:  K E Overvliet; K M Mayer; J B J Smeets; E Brenner
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2007-02-28
View more
  6 in total

1.  Serial search for fingers of the same hand but not for fingers of different hands.

Authors:  Krista E Overvliet; Jeroen B J Smeets; Eli Brenner
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-12-30       Impact factor: 1.972

2.  Combining eye and hand in search is suboptimal.

Authors:  Hanneke Liesker; Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-07-10       Impact factor: 1.972

3.  Haptic subitizing across the fingers.

Authors:  Myrthe A Plaisier; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Atten Percept Psychophys       Date:  2011-07       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Target contact and exploration strategies in haptic search.

Authors:  Vonne van Polanen; Wouter M Bergmann Tiest; Astrid M L Kappers
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2014-09-03       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  Eye-hand coupling is not the cause of manual return movements when searching.

Authors:  Hanneke Liesker; Eli Brenner; Jeroen B J Smeets
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2009-10-09       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  Grouping by proximity in haptic contour detection.

Authors:  Krista E Overvliet; Ralf Th Krampe; Johan Wagemans
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.