ArticleJournal of neurophysiology2016
Neural timing signal for precise tactile timing judgments.
Article in Journal of neurophysiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Continuous Vibration-Driven Virtual Tactile Motion Perception Across Fingertips.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Passive human touch cannot recognize the shape of a pattern imprinted on the fingertip.iScience · 2025Article
- Human tactile detection of within- and inter-finger spatiotemporal phase shifts of low-frequency vibrations.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Sub-Second Temporal Integration of Vibro-Tactile Stimuli: Intervals between Adjacent, Weak, and Within-Channel Stimuli Are Underestimated.Frontiers in psychology · 2017Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The brain can precisely encode the temporal relationship between tactile inputs. While behavioural studies have demonstrated precise interfinger temporal judgments, the underlying neural mechanism remains unknown. Computationally, two kinds of neural responses can act as the information source. One is the phase-locked response to the phase of relatively slow inputs, and the other is the response to the amplitude change of relatively fast inputs. To isolate the contributions of these components, we measured performance of a synchrony judgment task for sine wave and amplitude-modulation (AM) wave stimuli. The sine wave stimulus was a low-frequency sinusoid, with the phase shifted in the asynchronous stimulus. The AM wave stimulus was a low-frequency sinusoidal AM of a 250-Hz carrier, with only the envelope shifted in the asynchronous stimulus. In the experiment, three stimulus pairs, two synchronous ones and one asynchronous one, were sequentially presented to neighboring fingers, and participants were asked to report which one was the asynchronous pair. We found that the asynchrony of AM waves could be detected as precisely as single impulse pair, with the threshold asynchrony being ∼20 ms. On the other hand, the asynchrony of sine waves could not be detected at all in the range from 5 to 30 Hz. Our results suggest that the timing signal for tactile judgments is provided not by the stimulus phase information but by the envelope of the response of the high-frequency-sensitive Pacini channel (PC), although they do not exclude a possible contribution of the envelope of non-PCs.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.