Top-down modulation of shape and roughness discrimination in active touch by covert attention

Metzger, Anna; Mueller, Stefanie; Fiehler, Katja; Drewing, Knut

doi:10.3758/s13414-018-1625-5

Cited by 7 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Surface roughness disrupts the performance in search tasks addressing the shape of objects 7 . The discrimination thresholds in active touch for both shape and roughness perception were found to be higher when the respective discrimination task was unexpected, compared to conditions in which the task was expected 8 . The emphasis of shape versus texture perception also depends on the exploration procedures which were applied 9 .…”

mentioning

confidence: 73%

“…We understand similarity comparisons as a process, in which the 'respects' for similarity are established in the comparison context 18 . In a study of covert attention in perception by active touch, Metzger et al told participants only after tactile exploration if the task was discriminating roughness or shape 8 . They found that expectations regarding the task influenced the respective discrimination threshold.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tactile perception of randomly rough surfaces

Sahli

Prot

Wang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most everyday surfaces are randomly rough and self-similar on sufficiently small scales. We investigated the tactile perception of randomly rough surfaces using 3D-printed samples, where the topographic structure and the statistical properties of scale-dependent roughness were varied independently. We found that the tactile perception of similarity between surfaces was dominated by the statistical micro-scale roughness rather than by their topographic resemblance. Participants were able to notice differences in the Hurst roughness exponent of 0.2, or a difference in surface curvature of 0.8 $$\hbox {mm}^{-1}$$ mm - 1 for surfaces with curvatures between 1 and 3 $$\hbox {mm}^{-1}$$ mm - 1 . In contrast, visual perception of similarity between color-coded images of the surface height was dominated by their topographic resemblance. We conclude that vibration cues from roughness at the length scale of the finger ridge distance distract the participants from including the topography into the judgement of similarity. The interaction between surface asperities and fingertip skin led to higher friction for higher micro-scale roughness. Individual friction data allowed us to construct a psychometric curve which relates similarity decisions to differences in friction. Participants noticed differences in the friction coefficient as small as 0.035 for samples with friction coefficients between 0.34 and 0.45.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 73%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tactile perception of randomly rough surfaces

Sahli

Prot

Wang

et al. 2020

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The prolongations ensured that participants still had the impression of grasping a full cuboid. For more information on how the stimuli were created and how the different levels of the stimuli were determined, see Metzger et al (2019), the behavioral predecessor of the present study.…”

Section: Stimulimentioning

confidence: 99%

Neural correlates of top‐down modulation of haptic shape versus roughness perception

Mueller

Haas

Metzger

et al. 2019

Human Brain Mapping

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Exploring an object's shape by touch also renders information about its surface roughness. It has been suggested that shape and roughness are processed distinctly in the brain, a result based on comparing brain activation when exploring objects that differed in one of these features. To investigate the neural mechanisms of top‐down control on haptic perception of shape and roughness, we presented the same multidimensional objects but varied the relevance of each feature. Specifically, participants explored two objects that varied in shape (oblongness of cuboids) and surface roughness. They either had to compare the shape or the roughness in an alternative‐forced‐choice‐task. Moreover, we examined whether the activation strength of the identified brain regions as measured by functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) can predict the behavioral performance in the haptic discrimination task. We observed a widespread network of activation for shape and roughness perception comprising bilateral precentral and postcentral gyrus, cerebellum, and insula. Task‐relevance of the object's shape increased activation in the right supramarginal gyrus (SMG/BA 40) and the right precentral gyrus (PreCG/BA 44) suggesting that activation in these areas does not merely reflect stimulus‐driven processes, such as exploring shape, but also entails top‐down controlled processes driven by task‐relevance. Moreover, the strength of the SMG/PreCG activation predicted individual performance in the shape but not in the roughness discrimination task. No activation was found for the reversed contrast (roughness > shape). We conclude that macrogeometric properties, such as shape, can be modulated by top‐down mechanisms whereas roughness, a microgeometric feature, seems to be processed automatically.

show abstract

“…Shape is a crucial feature for efficiently interacting with objects in both the visual and tactile domains ( Rosch, 1988 ). While much is known about visual shape processing ( Haushofer et al, 2008 ; Peelen et al, 2014 ), less information is available regarding tactile shape processing ( Klatzky et al, 1985 ; Hernández-Pérez et al, 2017 ; Metzger et al, 2019 ). A series of studies comparing visual and tactile perceptual spaces with familiar objects have revealed that the human perception of familiar objects is not solely determined by the physical features of objects but is influenced by high-level cognitive abilities, including memory ( Amedi et al, 2002 ; Norman et al, 2008 ; Haag, 2011 ; Metzger and Drewing, 2019 ) and prior knowledge of objects for integrating sensory systems ( Ernst and Bülthoff, 2004 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visual and Tactile Sensory Systems Share Common Features in Object Recognition

Tabrik

Behroozi

Schlaffke

et al. 2021

eNeuro

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although we use our visual and tactile sensory systems interchangeably for object recognition on a daily basis, little is known about the mechanism underlying this ability. This study examined how 3D shape features of objects form two congruent and interchangeable visual and tactile perceptual spaces in healthy male and female participants. Since active exploration plays an important role in shape processing, a virtual reality environment was used to visually explore 3D objects called digital embryos without using the tactile sense. In addition, during the tactile procedure, blindfolded participants actively palpated a 3D-printed version of the same objects with both hands. We first demonstrated that the visual and tactile perceptual spaces were highly similar. We then extracted a series of 3D shape features to investigate how visual and tactile exploration can lead to the correct identification of the relationships between objects. The results indicate that both modalities share the same shape features to form highly similar veridical spaces. This finding suggests that visual and tactile systems might apply similar cognitive processes to sensory inputs that enable humans to rely merely on one modality in the absence of another to recognize surrounding objects.

show abstract

Top-down modulation of shape and roughness discrimination in active touch by covert attention

Cited by 7 publications

References 68 publications

Tactile perception of randomly rough surfaces

Tactile perception of randomly rough surfaces

Neural correlates of top‐down modulation of haptic shape versus roughness perception

Visual and Tactile Sensory Systems Share Common Features in Object Recognition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About