Exploring Fingers’ Limitation of Texture Density Perception on Ultrasonic Haptic Displays
read more
Citations
Finger motion and contact by a second finger influence the tactile perception of electrovibration.
Touch uses frictional cues to discriminate flat materials
Multi-mode soft haptic thimble for haptic augmented reality based application of texture overlaying
References
Squeeze film effect for the design of an ultrasonic tactile plate
Texture perception through direct and indirect touch: An analysis of perceptual space for tactile textures in two modes of exploration
Discrimination of Virtual Square Gratings by Dynamic Touch on Friction Based Tactile Displays
Surface haptics via electroadhesion: Expanding electrovibration with Johnsen and Rahbek
STIMTAC: a tactile input device with programmable friction
Related Papers (5)
Frequently Asked Questions (9)
Q2. What are the future works in "Exploring fingers’ limitation of texture density perception on ultrasonic haptic displays" ?
In the future, the authors would like to investigate if these results generalize to lefthanded users, which would confirm the importance of hand dominance. As well, a potential use of different sensory thresholds of finger types, which the authors found in their study, is to leverage these sensitivities to novel finger identification techniques on tactile displays [ 8, 19 ] in order to allow users to perform different interaction tasks.
Q3. What is the reason for the differences in sensitivity?
While hand dominance is most likely the driving force behind variable sensitivity, it is possible that perceptual differences could result from left-right physiological differences.
Q4. What is the advantage of the 1-up-1-down staircase procedure?
The 1-up-1-down staircase procedure offers the compelling advantage of reducing the total time of their experiment, since the authors investigate a high number of trials and conditions for each participant.
Q5. What are the sensitive fingers for perceiving differences in spatial textures?
Their results indicate that the index and the thumb are the most sensitive fingers for perceiving differences in spatial textures for both sine and square virtual gratings; the little finger, followed by the ring, is the least sensitive for texture perception in one-finger exploration for the two types of gratings.
Q6. What is the effect of the enhanced perception sensitivity?
This enhanced perception sensitivity permits the dominant hand to control exploratory motion in order to optimize the consistency of tactile feedback across fingers.
Q7. What is the common type of feedback used on touchscreens?
Current commercial touchscreen devices rarely provide a compelling haptic feedback to human fingers despite the use of touch as input; haptic feedback is typically limited to vibration.
Q8. What was the sensitive finger in the experiment?
The little finger was the least sensitive, i.e., had the highest perceptual threshold level in all conditions, and the ring finger was the second least sensitive in all conditions.
Q9. What is the significance of the results?
In terms of implications, for designers, these results provide guidance on the need to vary haptic stimuli depending on whether the stimulus is designed for the dominant or non-dominant hand, depending on whether it is designed for the index finger or for any finger, and depending on whether it is to be a single-finger of multi-finger interaction.