Effects of Delayed Visual Feedback on Grooved Pegboard Test Performance

Abstract

Using four experiments, this study investigates what amount of delay brings about maximal impairment under delayed visual feedback and whether a critical interval, such as that in audition, also exists in vision. The first experiment measured the Grooved Pegboard test performance as a function of visual feedback delays from 120 to 2120 ms in 16 steps. Performance sharply decreased until about 490 ms, then more gradually until 2120 ms, suggesting that two mechanisms were operating under delayed visual feedback. Since delayed visual feedback differs from delayed auditory feedback in that the former induces not only temporal but also spatial displacements between motor and sensory feedback, this difference could also exist in the mechanism responsible for spatial displacement. The second experiment was hence conducted to provide simultaneous haptic feedback together with delayed visual feedback to inform correct spatial position. The disruption was significantly ameliorated when information about spatial position was provided from a haptic source. The sharp decrease in performance of up to approximately 300 ms was followed by an almost flat performance. This is similar to the critical interval found in audition. Accordingly, the mechanism that caused the sharp decrease in performance in experiments 1 and 2 was probably mainly responsible for temporal disparity and is common across different modality–motor combinations, while the other mechanism that caused a rather gradual decrease in performance in experiment 1 was mainly responsible for spatial displacement. In experiments 3 and 4, the reliability of spatial information from the haptic source was reduced by wearing a glove or using a tool. When the reliability of spatial information was reduced, the data lay between those of experiments 1 and 2, and that a gradual decrease in performance partially reappeared. These results further support the notion that two mechanisms operate under delayed visual feedback.

Overcoming Stuttering Using Delayed Auditory Feedback (DAF): A Case Study

“…One of the findings of the research is that the effect of DAF on timing variability is directly influenced by the finger trajectory. According to Fujisaki (2012) delayed visual feedback is found to be effective on grooved pegboard test performance which supports the notion that two mechanisms (temporal as well as spatial displacements between motor and sensory feedback) operate under such techniques. What makes such techniques like DAF very important is that the signals it produces help stutterer to reduce his/ her stuttering frequency that is independent of the speaker's rate of speech (Hudock et al, 2011).…”

Audio-motor but not visuo-motor temporal recalibration speeds up sensory processing

“…Furthermore, temporal resolution is better for the auditory modality than the visual one [ 37 , 61 , 62 , 63 ]. Such a superiority of temporal processing of audition over vision could lead to a lower delay-detection threshold in audition than vision [ 16 , 119 ], resulting in auditory dominance over vision in sensorimotor TRE, which might imply that sensorimotor TRE can be affected by a top-down factor such as an attentional shift.…”

Feasibility of a walking virtual reality system for rehabilitation: objective and subjective parameters

“…It is also important to highlight that the lag of the system was shown to be smaller than that reported to cause sickness [ 44 , 45 ]. These results should be also emphasized since delayed visual feedback has been shown to affect performance, but not so much for delays of 120 ms [ 46 ].…”