Object Manipulation Improvements Due to Single Session Training Outweigh the Differences Among Stimulation Sites During Vibrotactile Feedback

Stepp, Cara E.; Matsuoka, Yoky

doi:10.1109/tnsre.2011.2168981

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 49 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Appropriate sites on the body for the vibrators must be found; for example, the vibration must be easy to perceive, and at the same time, the vibrators should not hinder movement. Interestingly, some sites might have an initial advantage in representing specific information, due to its naturalness; however, the advantage dissolves when users are given enough time to become familiar with less intuitive sites (Stepp & Matsuoka, 2011). Moreover, appropriate signal ranges and modulations (e.g., pulse or amplitude modulation) of the vibration must be evaluated (Stepp & Matsuoka, 2012).…”

Section: Vibrotactile Feedback Systems Need To Be Evaluated In Motor mentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is generally accepted that augmented feedback, provided by a human expert or a technical display, effectively enhances motor learning. However, discussion of the way to most effectively provide augmented feedback has been controversial. Related studies have focused primarily on simple or artificial tasks enhanced by visual feedback. Recently, technical advances have made it possible also to investigate more complex, realistic motor tasks and to implement not only visual, but also auditory, haptic, or multimodal augmented feedback. The aim of this review is to address the potential of augmented unimodal and multimodal feedback in the framework of motor learning theories. The review addresses the reasons for the different impacts of feedback strategies within or between the visual, auditory, and haptic modalities and the challenges that need to be overcome to provide appropriate feedback in these modalities, either in isolation or in combination. Accordingly, the design criteria for successful visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback are elaborated.

show abstract

Section: Vibrotactile Feedback Systems Need To Be Evaluated In Motor mentioning

confidence: 99%

Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a recent study, eighteen unimpaired individuals participated for 2.5–4 hours using this interface to manipulate a virtual object with visual and vibrotactile feedback at four body sites (finger, arm, neck, and foot), presented in a random order [25]. We found that the effects of learning over the course of the experiment overshadowed the effects of supplying feedback at different stimulation sites.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 84%

“…We used a previously-designed robotic and virtual interface to study object manipulation in which both visual, direct haptic, and vibrotactile feedback could be experimentally controlled [25]. This virtual task allowed us to study the effects of vibrotactile feedback as a substitute for typical, direct force feedback in healthy participants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Repeated Training with Augmentative Vibrotactile Feedback Increases Object Manipulation Performance

Stepp

Matsuoka

2012

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most users of prosthetic hands must rely on visual feedback alone, which requires visual attention and cognitive resources. Providing haptic feedback of variables relevant to manipulation, such as contact force, may thus improve the usability of prosthetic hands for tasks of daily living. Vibrotactile stimulation was explored as a feedback modality in ten unimpaired participants across eight sessions in a two-week period. Participants used their right index finger to perform a virtual object manipulation task with both visual and augmentative vibrotactile feedback related to force. Through repeated training, participants were able to learn to use the vibrotactile feedback to significantly improve object manipulation. Removal of vibrotactile feedback in session 8 significantly reduced task performance. These results suggest that vibrotactile feedback paired with training may enhance the manipulation ability of prosthetic hand users without the need for more invasive strategies.

show abstract

“…Simple tasks such as reach, grasp, or object manipulation that employ both visual and tactile/haptic feedback have shown the most promising effects of multimodal feedback [26-28, 32, 33], while other studies have shown deterioration of performance [15, 30, 31]. Specifically, Rosati et al [34] found that combining auditory and visual feedback resulted in improved performance during learning of tracking motion exercises.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined Auditory and Vibrotactile Feedback for Human–Machine-Interface Control

Thorp

Larson

Stepp

2014

IEEE Trans. Neural Syst. Rehabil. Eng.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the addition of binary vibrotactile stimulation to continuous auditory feedback (vowel synthesis) for human-machine-interface (HMI) control. Sixteen healthy participants controlled facial surface electromyography to achieve two-dimensional (2D) targets (vowels). Eight participants used only real-time auditory feedback to locate targets whereas the other eight participants were additionally alerted to having achieved targets with confirmatory vibrotactile stimulation at the index finger. All participants trained using their assigned feedback modality (auditory alone or combined auditory and vibrotactile) over three sessions on three days and completed a fourth session on the third day using novel targets to assess generalization. Analyses of variance performed on the 1) percentage of targets reached and 2) percentage of trial time at the target revealed a main effect for feedback modality: participants using combined auditory and vibrotactile feedback performed significantly better than those using auditory feedback alone. No effect was found for session or the interaction of feedback modality and session, indicating a successful generalization to novel targets but lack of improvement over training sessions. Future research is necessary to determine the cognitive cost associated with combined auditory and vibrotactile feedback during HMI control.

show abstract

Object Manipulation Improvements Due to Single Session Training Outweigh the Differences Among Stimulation Sites During Vibrotactile Feedback

Cited by 26 publications

References 49 publications

Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review

Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review

Repeated Training with Augmentative Vibrotactile Feedback Increases Object Manipulation Performance

Combined Auditory and Vibrotactile Feedback for Human–Machine-Interface Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About