Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35072177›Full record

ArticleWorld Haptics Conference. World Haptics Conference2021

Individual differences impacting skin deformation and tactile discrimination with compliant elastic surfaces.

Bingxu Li, Gregory J Gerling

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World Haptics Conference. World Haptics Conference, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bingxu LiSchool of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904 USA.
Gregory J GerlingSchool of Engineering and Applied Science, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA 22904 USA.
University of Virginia · US

Funding

CRCNS: Neural Representations of Object Compliance in the Periphery R01NS105241 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA · PI GERLING, GREGORY JOHN, LUMPKIN, ELLEN A · 2017 to 2019
$990k
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS105241
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Individual differences in tactile acuity are observed within and between age cohorts. Such differences in acuity may be attributed to various sources, including aspects of nervous system, skin mechanics, finger size, cognitive and behavioral factors, etc. This work considers individual differences, within a younger cohort of participants, in discriminating compliant surfaces. These participants exhibit a range of finger size and stiffness. Interestingly, both their finger size and stiffness well predict their discriminative performance, where softer/smaller fingers outperform stiffer/larger fingers. Stereo imaging captured biomechanical cues in the skin's deformation, including contact area and penetration depth, and their change rates. In those individuals with stiffer/larger fingers, who perceptually performed worse, we observed less distinguishable contact areas and eccentricities, compared to softer/smaller fingers. These particular cues well predicted individual differences observed in perceptual discrimination. In comparison, with two other cues, curvature and penetration depth, the imaging readily distinguished the compliant surfaces irrespective of finger stiffness/size, not aligned with discrimination. In conclusion, in passive touch, we find that individuals with softer/smaller fingers were better at discriminating compliances, and that certain skin deformation cues predict individual differences in perception.

Identifiers

PMID35072177
PMCPMC8778951
OpenAlexW3193756479

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.