Literature DB >> 36002628

Methodological considerations for the force-matching task.

David McNaughton1, Rhys Hope2, Emily Gray2, Freya Xavier2, Alissa Beath2, Michael Jones2.   

Abstract

The force-matching task integrates haptic technology and electrical engineering to determine an individual's level of sensory attenuation to somatic stimuli. The task requires a detailed methodology to facilitate reliable and replicable estimates, and there has been a distinct lack of re-evaluation of the methodological processes related to this paradigm. In this task, participants are asked to match a force delivered to their finger, either by pressing directly on their own finger with their other hand (known as the direct condition) or by controlling the device using an external potentiometer to control the force indirectly through a torque motor (known as the slider condition). We analysed 138 participants to determine 1) the optimal number of replications (2, 4, 6, or 8 replications) of the target force, 2) the optimal time window (1-1.5 s, 1.5-2 s, 2-2.5 s and 2.5-3 s) to extract the estimate of sensory attenuation, 3) if participants' performance during the task improved, worsened or was stable across the experimental period regardless of condition, and 4) if learning effects were related to psychological traits. Results showed that the number of replications of the target forces may be reduced from 8 without compromising the estimate of sensory attenuation, the optimal time window for the extraction of the matched force is 2.5-3 s, the performance is stable over the duration of the experiment and not impacted by the measured psychological traits. In conclusion, we present a number of methodological considerations which improve the efficiency and reliability of the force-matching task. HIGHLIGHTS: • The force-matching task determines an individual's level of sensory attenuation • The optimal number of replications of the target force may be reduced from 8 • The optimal time window to extract the matched force is 2.5-3.0 s • The estimate of sensory attenuation is stable across the duration of the task.
© 2022. The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Force-matching; Methodology; Perception; Sensorimotor; Sensory attenuation

Year:  2022        PMID: 36002628     DOI: 10.3758/s13428-022-01954-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Behav Res Methods        ISSN: 1554-351X


  13 in total

1.  The positive and negative affect schedule (PANAS): construct validity, measurement properties and normative data in a large non-clinical sample.

Authors:  John R Crawford; Julie D Henry
Journal:  Br J Clin Psychol       Date:  2004-09

2.  Perception of the consequences of self-action is temporally tuned and event driven.

Authors:  Paul M Bays; Daniel M Wolpert; J Randall Flanagan
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2005-06-21       Impact factor: 10.834

3.  Physiological and Perceptual Sensory Attenuation Have Different Underlying Neurophysiological Correlates.

Authors:  Clare E Palmer; Marco Davare; James M Kilner
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Evidence for sensory prediction deficits in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Sukhwinder S Shergill; Gabrielle Samson; Paul M Bays; Chris D Frith; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  Am J Psychiatry       Date:  2005-12       Impact factor: 18.112

5.  Perceptual sensory attenuation in chronic pain subjects and healthy controls.

Authors:  David McNaughton; Alissa Beath; Julia Hush; Michael Jones
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2022-05-27       Impact factor: 4.996

6.  Patient Health Questionnaire Anxiety and Depression Scale: Initial Validation in Three Clinical Trials.

Authors:  Kurt Kroenke; Jingwei Wu; Zhangsheng Yu; Matthew J Bair; Jacob Kean; Timothy Stump; Patrick O Monahan
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2016 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 4.312

7.  Loss of sensory attenuation in patients with functional (psychogenic) movement disorders.

Authors:  Isabel Pareés; Harriet Brown; Atsuo Nuruki; Rick A Adams; Marco Davare; Kailash P Bhatia; Karl Friston; Mark J Edwards
Journal:  Brain       Date:  2014-08-26       Impact factor: 13.501

8.  Attenuation of self-generated tactile sensations is predictive, not postdictive.

Authors:  Paul M Bays; J Randall Flanagan; Daniel M Wolpert
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2006-01-17       Impact factor: 8.029

Review 9.  Active inference, sensory attenuation and illusions.

Authors:  Harriet Brown; Rick A Adams; Isabel Parees; Mark Edwards; Karl Friston
Journal:  Cogn Process       Date:  2013-06-07

10.  Functional magnetic resonance imaging of impaired sensory prediction in schizophrenia.

Authors:  Sukhwinder S Shergill; Thomas P White; Daniel W Joyce; Paul M Bays; Daniel M Wolpert; Chris D Frith
Journal:  JAMA Psychiatry       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 21.596

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.