ArticleeNeuro
Visual and Tactile Sensory Systems Share Common Features in Object Recognition.
Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Larg-scale multimodal fMRI dataset of visual and haptic 3D object category learning.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Article
- Passive human touch cannot recognize the shape of a pattern imprinted on the fingertip.iScience · 2025Article
- Temporal Electroencephalography Traits Dissociating Tactile Information and Cross-Modal Congruence Effects.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Tactile-Sensing Technologies: Trends, Challenges and Outlook in Agri-Food Manipulation.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- Substitutive proprioception feedback of a prosthetic wrist by electrotactile stimulation.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2023Article
- Visual categories and concepts in the avian brain.Animal cognition · 2023Review
- Digital embryos: a novel technical approach to investigate perceptual categorization in pigeons (Columba livia) using machine learning.Animal cognition · 2022Article
- 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although we use our visual and tactile sensory systems interchangeably for object recognition on a daily basis, little is known about the mechanism underlying this ability. This study examined how 3D shape features of objects form two congruent and interchangeable visual and tactile perceptual spaces in healthy male and female participants. Since active exploration plays an important role in shape processing, a virtual reality environment was used to visually explore 3D objects called digital embryos without using the tactile sense. In addition, during the tactile procedure, blindfolded participants actively palpated a 3D-printed version of the same objects with both hands. We first demonstrated that the visual and tactile perceptual spaces were highly similar. We then extracted a series of 3D shape features to investigate how visual and tactile exploration can lead to the correct identification of the relationships between objects. The results indicate that both modalities share the same shape features to form highly similar veridical spaces. This finding suggests that visual and tactile systems might apply similar cognitive processes to sensory inputs that enable humans to rely merely on one modality in the absence of another to recognize surrounding objects.
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.