Further analysis of active and passive touch in pattern discrimination

Abstract

Discrimination of cookie-cutter patterns by active and passive touch was compared in humans under conditions which attempted to equate the con tactual movement of the stimulus over the skin surface in the two modes. We find that the lack of self-initiated movement made no difference in accurate identification of these patterns, contrary to the postulation by Gibson (1962). Further, the results agree with certain neurophysiological findings which suggest that the dorsal columns are critical for the tactile discrimination of spatiotemporal features of stimuli, rather than for mediation of active vs. passive touch per se.

Active versus passive learning and testing in a complex outside built environment

“…While it is often reported that passive travellers (e.g., car passengers) learn less than active explorers (e.g., drivers ;Appleyard 1970;Downs and Stea 1973;Hart and Berzok 1982), the reverse is also possible since mental load may be reduced in passive individuals because they are not faced with the distractions of physically negotiating the route. Some studies have shown that spatial learning in the real world is better achieved through active rather than passive exploration (Gibson 1962;Held and Hein 1963;Herman and Siegel 1978;Foreman et al 1990;Mittelstaedt and Glasauer 1991;Laudeman and Johnson 1993;Larish and Andersen 1995), but other studies have failed to demonstrate better performance following active learning (Schwartz et al 1975;Walk et al 1988;Ito and Matsunaga 1990). Therefore, the literature on spatial cognition does not allow us to state conclusively whether it is advantageous to be an active participant or a passive observer when being exposed to a new environment.…”

The perception of surface roughness by active and passive touch

“…These fields continue to assert the general superiority of active as opposed to passive touch (e.g., Goldstein, 1980;Gordon, 1978 ;Kenshalo, 1978;Stevens & Green, 1978). Yet there is clearly no difference in the perception of roughness by active and passive touch (with object movement); nor, apparently, is there any difference in the percep-,tion of braille characters under similar conditions of tactual examination (Grunwald, 1978;Day & Dickinson, Note 1), or in yet other situations in which certain form-related tasks are involved (e.g., Schwartz, Perey, & Azulay, 1975). It is therefore inappropriate to continue making such general statements regarding the relative superiority of active touch without regard to the particular task .…”

Tactile retention: Reading with the skin

“…Heller (1974) found that active touch produced better form recognition than drawing on the skin or the static pressing of an outline form on the skin, both forms of passive touch. Although, Schwartz, Perey, and Azulay (1975) found that passive touch was no less accurate than active discrimination of form, their subjects required less time to make shape discriminations using active touch. Furthermore, Magee and Kennedy found that meaningful haptic forms might be better recognized when touch was passive (Magee & Kennedy, 1976, as reported by Kennedy, 1978).…”

“…Lashley (1951) expressed a similar view when he states: "The shape of an object can scarcely be detected with simultaneous pressure, but the same shape can readily be distinguished by touch when traced on the skin with a moving point or when explored by tactile scanning." Active touch has been shown to be better than the static deformation of thc skin (Gibson, 1962;Schwartz et al, 1975). However, the adequacy of graphesthesia has not been quantified.…”