A tactile spatial aftereffect

Day, R. H.; Singer, G.

doi:10.1080/00049536408255500

Cited by 7 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Two other early studies (Day and Singer, 1964 ; Gilbert, 1967 ) had strong similarities to the present study. In both studies, participants compared the perceived distance between two parallel bars pressed transversely against one forearm (the reference arm) with two similar bars pressed against the other forearm.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

“…However, the proper interpretation of these studies’ results is somewhat unclear. Gilbert ( 1967 ) argued that the apparent repulsion effect reported by Day and Singer ( 1964 ) owed primarily to the authors’ use of different ranges of comparison distances for the “inside” and “outside” adaptation conditions, ranges that were not symmetrically distributed about the reference separation; the exposure to particular distributions of comparison distances may have resulted in a recalibration of the perception of distance, a sort of statistical adaptation described previously by Helson ( 1947 ). Gilbert ( 1967 ) suggested that, when this factor was taken into account, little evidence remained for a true repulsion effect in either study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

“…The adapting stimulus was applied either on the intervening skin between the reference bars (“inside adaptation”) or on the adjacent skin outside the reference bars (“outside adaptation”). The perceived distance between the reference bars increased following adaptation of the intervening skin (Day and Singer, 1964 ) and decreased following adaptation of the adjacent outside skin (Day and Singer, 1964 ; Gilbert, 1967 ). Both results indicated that the bars were perceptually shifted away from the adapted skin regions, a repulsion illusion consistent with our findings.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Spatial repulsion illusions have been well documented in vision (Clifford et al, 2007 ; Kohn, 2007 ; Schwartz et al, 2007 ) and to a lesser extent in audition (Kashino and Nishida, 1998 ; Carlile et al, 2001 ) but have rarely been reported in touch. An early tactile study reported that prolonged static pressure on the forearm altered the perceived separation between parallel bars placed on adjacent skin areas in a direction consistent with perceptual repulsion (Day and Singer, 1964 ). A follow-up study suggested, however, that the observed effects may not have been aftereffects but rather perceptual recalibrations induced by the particular sets of comparison stimuli to which the participants were exposed (Gilbert, 1967 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

An Adaptation-Induced Repulsion Illusion in Tactile Spatial Perception

Chan

Iqbal

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Following focal sensory adaptation, the perceived separation between visual stimuli that straddle the adapted region is often exaggerated. For instance, in the tilt aftereffect illusion, adaptation to tilted lines causes subsequently viewed lines with nearby orientations to be perceptually repelled from the adapted orientation. Repulsion illusions in the nonvisual senses have been less studied. Here, we investigated whether adaptation induces a repulsion illusion in tactile spatial perception. In a two-interval forced-choice task, participants compared the perceived separation between two point-stimuli applied on the forearms successively. Separation distance was constant on one arm (the reference) and varied on the other arm (the comparison). In Experiment 1, we took three consecutive baseline measurements, verifying that in the absence of manipulation, participants’ distance perception was unbiased across arms and stable across experimental blocks. In Experiment 2, we vibrated a region of skin on the reference arm, verifying that this focally reduced tactile sensitivity, as indicated by elevated monofilament detection thresholds. In Experiment 3, we applied vibration between the two reference points in our distance perception protocol and discovered that this caused an illusory increase in the separation between the points. We conclude that focal adaptation induces a repulsion aftereffect illusion in tactile spatial perception. The illusion provides clues as to how the tactile system represents spatial information. The analogous repulsion aftereffects caused by adaptation in different stimulus domains and sensory systems may point to fundamentally similar strategies for dynamic sensory coding.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An Adaptation-Induced Repulsion Illusion in Tactile Spatial Perception

Chan

Iqbal

et al. 2017

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Day and Singer ( 1964 ) found a spatial repulsion aftereffect following sustained pressure on the forearm. Two bars placed either side of the adapted region were perceived as further apart than a comparison stimulus on the other arm.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%