ArticleScientific reports2020
Visual motion information modulates tactile roughness perception.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
We perceive the roughness of an object through our eyes and hands. Many crossmodal studies have reported that there is no clear visuo-tactile interaction in roughness perception using static visual cues. One exception is that the visual observation of task-irrelevant hand movements, not the texture of task-relevant objects, can enhance the performance of tactile roughness discrimination. Our study investigated whether task-irrelevant visual motion without either object roughness or bodily cues can influence tactile roughness perception. Participants were asked to touch abrasive papers while moving their hand laterally and viewing moving or static sine wave gratings without being able to see their hand, and to estimate the roughness magnitude of the tactile stimuli. Moving gratings with a low spatial frequency induced smoother roughness perceptions than static visual stimuli when the visual grating moved in the direction opposite the hand movements. The effects of visual motion did not appear when the visual stimuli had a high spatial frequency or when the participants touched the tactile stimuli passively. These results indicate that simple task-irrelevant visual movement without object roughness or bodily cues can modulate tactile roughness perception with active body movements in a spatial-frequency-selective manner.
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.