Biomedical subjects

Emily Spry

Publications and source records attributed to Emily Spry.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

PubMed2005

Spatial modulation of tactile temporal-order judgments.

We report a series of three experiments designed to examine the effect of posture on tactile temporal processing. Observers reported which of two tactile stimuli, presented to the left and right index fingers (experiments 1-3; or thumb, experiment 3), was perceived first while adopting one of two postures--hands-close (adjacent, but not touching) or hands-far (1 m apart)--in the dark. Just-noticeable differences were significantly smaller in the hands-far posture across all three experiments. In the first two experiments we compared hand versus foot responses and found equivalent advantages for the hands-far posture. In the final experiment the stimuli were presented to either the same or different digit on each hand (index finger or thumb) and we found that only when the same digit on each hand was stimulated was there an advantage for the hands-far posture. The finding that temporal precision was better with greater distance contradicts predictions based on attention-switching models of temporal-order judgments, and also contrasts with results from similar experimental manipulations in other modalities (eg vision). These results provide support for a rapid and automatic process that transforms the representation of a tactile stimulus from a skin-centred reference frame to a more external (eg body-centred or allocentric) one.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Confusing the mind by crossing the hands.

Observers made temporal order judgements (TOJs) regarding which of two tactile stimuli presented to either hand (at stimulus onset asynchronies of up to 200 ms) occurred first. When the observers' hands were placed in an uncrossed posture (i.e., each hand in its own hemispace), performance was accurate, with a just noticeable difference (JND; the smallest interval which produces 75% correct performance) of 34 ms. By contrast, when the hands were crossed over the midline, performance declined such that 124 ms was needed for accurate performance. In a second experiment, we presented visual instead of tactile stimuli to evaluate the relative contribution of motor and perceptual confusions to the effect. While performance with crossed hands was significantly worse than with uncrossed hands (JND=36 vs. 31 ms, respectively), this difference was negligible compared to that with tactile stimuli. In a third experiment, experienced observers showed a robust crossed-hands deficit which was not improved by using different fingers on either hand. We argue that the decline in tactile discrimination performance when the hands are crossed reflects a failure to represent appropriately near simultaneous bimanual tactile stimuli, and stands in marked contrast to many recent observations of efficient remapping of singly-presented tactile stimuli.

Analysis of Variance↗