Search

When lifting an object sequentially with the two hands, information about object weight can be transferred from one hand to the other. This information can be used to predictively scale fingertip forces and to form a perceptual estimation about the object's weight. This study investigated how weight information can be transferred between the two hands and how this depends on the used hand and handedness of the participant. Right- and left-handed participants lifted light and heavy objects with the right or left hand in a pseudorandomized order and estimated the object's weight. Results showed that predictive force scaling depended on the previously lifted object, with higher force rates if a previous object was heavy. This known effect of sensorimotor memory was mostly independent of the used hand and handedness, indicating that weight information could be transferred across hands for fingertip force scaling. Furthermore, a perceptual bias that depended on the previous lifted object was found, with lower weight estimations when the previous object was heavy compared to light. While this bias was found for both light and heavy objects in right-handers, it was only observed for light objects in left-handers. Notably, in contrast to the results on force scaling, this effect was not transferred across hands. These findings indicate that the transfer of weight information depends differently on the used hand and handedness for perceptual estimations and predictive force scaling., Competing Interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2022 Vonne van Polanen. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

When grasping an object, the opening between the fingertips (grip aperture) scales with the size of the object. If an object changes in size, the grip aperture has to be corrected. In this study, it was investigated whether such corrections would influence the perceived size of objects. The grasping plan was manipulated with a preview of the object, after which participants initiated their reaching movement without vision. In a minority of the grasps, the object changed in size after the preview and participants had to adjust their grasping movement. Visual feedback was manipulated in two experiments. In experiment 1, vision was restored during reach and both visual and haptic information was available to correct the grasp and lift the object. In experiment 2, no visual information was provided during the movement and grasps could only be corrected using haptic information. Participants made reach-to-grasp movements towards two objects and compared these in size. Results showed that participants adjusted their grasp to a change in object size from preview to grasped object in both experiments. However, a change in object size did not bias the perception of object size or alter discrimination performance. In experiment 2, a small perceptual bias was found when objects changed from large to small. However, this bias was much smaller than the difference that could be discriminated and could not be considered meaningful. Therefore, it can be concluded that the planning and execution of reach-to-grasp movements do not reliably affect the perception of object size., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

In a search task, where one has to search for the presence of a target among distractors, the target is sometimes easily found, whereas in other searches it is much harder to find. The performance in a search task is influenced by the identity of the target, the identity of the distractors and the differences between the two. In this study, these factors were manipulated by varying the target and distractors in shape (cube or sphere) and roughness (rough or smooth) in a haptic search task. Participants had to grasp a bundle of items and determine as fast as possible whether a predefined target was present or not. It was found that roughness and edges were relatively salient features and the search for the presence of these features was faster than for their absence. If the task was easy, the addition of these features could also disrupt performance, even if they were irrelevant for the search task. Another important finding was that the search for a target that differed in two properties from the distractors was faster than a task with only a single property difference, although this was only found if the two target properties were non-salient. This means that shape and texture can be effectively integrated. Finally, it was found that edges are more beneficial to a search task than disrupting, whereas for roughness this was the other way round.

In this study the saliency of hardness and softness were investigated in an active haptic search task. Two experiments were performed to explore these properties in different contexts. In Experiment 1, blindfolded participants had to grasp a bundle of spheres and determine the presence of a hard target among soft distractors or vice versa. If the difference in compliance between target and distractors was small, reaction times increased with the number of items for both features; a serial strategy was found to be used. When the difference in compliance was large, the reaction times were independent of the number of items, indicating a parallel strategy. In Experiment 2, blindfolded participants pressed their hand on a display filled with hard and soft items. In the search for a soft target, increasing reaction times with the number of items were found, but the location of target and distractors appeared to have a large influence on the search difficulty. In the search for a hard target, reaction times did not depend on the number of items. In sum, this showed that both hardness and softness are salient features.