Visual and haptic influence on perception of stimulus size

Attention, Perception, and Psychophysics

Volumn 72, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 813-822

  van Doorn, George H ^a   Richardson, Barry L ^a   Wuillemin, Dianne B ^a   Symmons, Mark A ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BALLARAT   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PERCEPTIVE DISCRIMINATION; PERCEPTIVE THRESHOLD; PHOTOSTIMULATION; PHYSIOLOGY; TOUCH; VISION;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; DISCRIMINATION (PSYCHOLOGY); FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; PHOTIC STIMULATION; SENSORY THRESHOLDS; TOUCH; VISUAL PERCEPTION; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 77955296982     PISSN: 19433921     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/APP.72.3.813     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Bacon, J.H., & Shaw, L. (1982). Effect of conflict awareness on visual dominance. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 54, 263-267.
2. Easton, R.D., & Moran, P.W. (1978). A quantitative confirmation of visual capture of curvature. Journal of General Psychology, 98, 105-112.
3. Ernst, M.O., & Bülthoff, H. H. (2004). Merging the senses into a robust percept. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8, 162-169.
4. Fishkin, S.M., Pishkin, V., & Stahl, M.L. (1975). Factors involved in visual capture. Perceptual & Motor Skills, 40, 427-434.
5. Hadjikhani, N., & Roland, P.E. (1998). Cross-modal transfer of information between the tactile and the visual representations in the human brain: A positron emission tomographic study. Journal of Neuroscience, 18, 1072-1084.
6. Helbig, H.B., & Ernst, M.O. (2007). Knowledge about a common source can promote visual-haptic integration. Perception, 36, 1523-1533.
7. Hershberger, W.A., & Misceo, G.F. (1996). Touch dominates haptic estimates of discordant visual-haptic size. Perception & Psychophysics, 58, 1124-1132.
8. Hollins, M., & Goble, A.K. (1988). Perception of the length of voluntary movements. Somatosensory Research, 5, 335-348.
9. Jansson, G., Billberger, K., Petrie, H., Colwell, C., Kornbrot, D., Fänger, J., et al. (1999). Haptic virtual environments for blind people: Exploratory experiments with two devices. International Journal of Virtual Reality, 4, 10-20.
10. Kirkpatrick, A.E., & Douglas, S.A. (2002, March). Application-based evaluation of haptic interfaces. In Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems (pp. 32-39). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society Press.
11. Klein, R. (1966). A developmental study of perception under conditions of conflicting sensory cues. Dissertation Abstracts, 27, 2162B-2163B.
12. Lakatos, S., & Marks, L.E. (1999). Haptic form perception: Relative salience of local and global features. Perception & Psychophysics, 61, 895-908.
13. Loomis, J.M., Klatzky, R.L., & Lederman, S.J. (1991). Similarity in tactual and visual picture recognition with limited field of view. Perception, 20, 167-177.
14. McDonnell, P.M., & Duffett, J. (1972). Vision and touch: A reconsideration of conflict between the two senses. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 26, 171-180.
15. Motter, B.C. (1993). Focal attention produces spatially selective processing in visual cortical areas V1, V2, and V4 in the presence of competing stimuli. Journal of Neurophysiology, 70, 909-919.
16. Phillips, F., Egan, E.J.L., & Perry, B.N. (2009). Perceptual equivalence between vision and touch is complexity dependent. Acta Psychologica, 132, 259-266.
17. Richardson, B.L., Symmons, M., & Accardi, R. (2000). The TDS: A new device for comparing active and passive-guided touch. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 8, 414-417.
18. Richardson, B.L., Symmons, M., & Wuillemin, D.B. (2006). Passive exploration and static skin might be more useful than previously assumed. In A. Khedder (Ed.), Proceedings of Eurohaptics 2006 (pp. 57-59). Paris: Académie des Technologies.
19. Richardson, B.L., Symmons, M., Wuillemin, D.B., & Van Doorn, G.H. (2005, March). Looking through a fingertip. Poster presented at the World Haptics Conference, Pisa, Italy.
20. Rock, I., & Victor, J. (1964). Vision and touch: An experimentally created conflict between the two senses. Science, 143, 594-596.
21. Rosch, E.H., Mervis, C.B., Grey, W.D., Johnson, D.M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
22. Faraco, S., & Deco, G. (2009). Multisensory contributions to the perception of vibrotactile events. Behavioural Brain Research, 196, 145-154.
23. Soto-Faraco, S., Spence, C., & Kingstone, A. (2004). Cross-modal dynamic capture: Congruency effects in the perception of motion across sensory modalities. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 30, 330-345.
24. Spence, C. (2002). Multisensory attention and tactile information-processing. Behavioural Brain Research, 135, 57-64.
25. Spence, C., & Driver, J. (1997). On measuring selective attention to an expected sensory modality. Perception & Psychophysics, 59, 389-403.
26. Spence, C., & Walton, M. (2005). On the inability to ignore touch when responding to vision in the crossmodal congruency task. Acta Psychologica, 118, 47-70. Symmons, M., Richardson, B.L., &.
27. Wuillemin, D.B. (2004). Active versus passive touch: Superiority depends more on the task than the mode. In S. Ballesterios & M. Heller (Eds.), Touch blindness and neuroscience (pp. 179-185). Madrid: Universidad Nacional de Educacion a Distancia.
28. Welch, R.B., & Warren, D.H. (1980). Immediate perceptual response to intersensory discrepancy. Psychological Bulletin, 88, 638-667.
29. Welch, R.B., Widawski, M.H., Harrington, J., & Warren, D.H. (1979). An examination of the relationship between visual capture and prism adaptation. Perception & Psychophysics, 25, 126-132.