Haptic Aftereffect of Softness

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9774)

Abstract

Past sensory experience can influence present perception. We studied the effect of adaptation in haptic softness perception. Participants compared two silicon rubber stimuli, a reference and a comparison stimulus, by indenting them simultaneously with the index fingers of their two hands and decided which one felt softer. In adaptation conditions the index finger that explored the reference stimulus had previously been adapted to another rubber stimulus. The adaptation stimulus was indented 5 times with a force of >15 N, thus the two index fingers had a different sensory past. In baseline conditions there was no previous adaptation. We measured the Points of Subjective Equality (PSEs) of one reference stimulus to a set of comparison stimuli. We used four different adaptation stimuli, one was harder, two were softer and one had approximately the same compliance as compared to the reference stimulus. PSEs shifted as a function of the compliance of the adaptation stimulus: the reference was perceived to be softer when the finger had been adapted to a harder stimulus and it was perceived to be harder after adaptation to a softer stimulus. We conclude that recent sensory experience causes a shift of haptically perceived softness away from the softness of the adaptation stimulus. The finding that perceived softness is susceptible to adaptation suggests that there might be neural channels tuned to different softness values and softness is an independent primary perceptual quality.

Keywords

Softness Stiffness Haptic Tactile Perception Adaptation Aftereffect 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by a grant from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB/TRR 135, A5).

References

  1. 1.
    Webster, M.A.: Adaptation and visual coding. J. Vis. 11, 1–23 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gibson, J.J.: Adaptation, after-effect and contrast in the perception of curved lines. J. Exp. Psychol. 16, 1–31 (1933)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Thompson, P., Burr, D.: Visual aftereffects. Curr. Biol. 19, R11–R14 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Addams, R.: An account of a peculiar optical phenomenon seen after having looked at a moving body. London Edinb. Philos. Mag. J. Sci. 5, 373–374 (1834)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Graham, N.V.: Visual Pattern Analyzers. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Barlow, H.B., Hill, R.M.: Evidence for a physiological explanation of the waterfall phenomenon and figural aftereffects. Nature 200, 1345–1347 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Locke, J.: An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. In: Nidditch, P.H. (ed.). Clarendon Press, Oxford (1690/1975)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kappers, A.M., Bergmann Tiest, W.M.: Aftereffects in touch. In: Prescott, T.J., Ahissar, E., Izhikevitch, E. (eds.) Scholarpedia of Touch, pp. 317–326. Atlantis Press, Paris (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lederman, S.J., Klatzky, R.L.: Hand movements: a window into haptic object recognition. Cogn. Psychol. 19, 342–368 (1987)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kaim, L., Drewing, K.: Exploratory strategies in haptic softness discrimination are tuned to achieve high levels of task performance. IEEE Trans. Haptics 4, 242–252 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Srinivasan, M.A., LaMotte, R.H.: Tactual discrimination of softness: abilities and mechanisms. In: Franzen, O., Johansson, R., Terenius, L. (eds.) Somesthesis and the Neurobiology of the Somatosensory Cortex, pp. 123–135. Birkhäuser, Basel (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Srinivasan, M.A., LaMotte, R.H.: Tactual discrimination of softness. J. Neurophysiol. 73, 88–101 (1995)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bergmann Tiest, W.M., Kappers, A.M.L.: Cues for haptic perception of compliance. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2, 189–199 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsui, K., Okamoto, S., Yamada, Y.: Relative contribution ratios of skin and proprioceptive sensations in perception of force applied to fingertip. IEEE Trans. Haptics 7, 78–85 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Metzger, A., Drewing, K.: Haptically perceived softness of deformable stimuli can be manipulated by applying external forces during the exploration. In: 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC), Evanston, IL, USA, pp. 75–81 (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kuschel, M., Freyberger, F., Färber, B., Buss, M.: Visual-haptic perception of compliant objects in artificially generated environments. Vis. Comput. 24, 923–931 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cellini, C., Kaim, L., Drewing, K.: Visual and haptic integration in the estimation of softness of deformable objects. i-Perception 4, 516–531 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Avanzini, F., Crosato, P.: Haptic-auditory rendering and perception of contact stiffness. In: McGookin, D., Brewster, S. (eds.) HAID 2006. LNCS, vol. 4129, pp. 24–35. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harper, R., Stevens, S.: Subjective hardness of compliant materials. Q. J. Exp. Psychol. 16, 204–215 (1964)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Friedman, R.M., Hester, K.D., Green, B.G., LaMotte, R.H.: Magnitude estimation of softness. Exp. Brain Res. 191, 133–142 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Xu, H., Dayan, P., Lipkin, R.M., Qian, N.: Adaptation across the cortical hierarchy: lowlevel curve adaptation affects high-level facial expression judgments. J. Neurosci. 28, 3374–3383 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Justus-Liebig University GiessenGiessenGermany

Personalised recommendations