Abstract

Many studies have already shown that a large idiosyncratic orientation difference is needed to perceive two bars that are far apart as haptically parallel. There exist also strong indications that if such bars are imagined to be minute hands of clocks, errors made in clock time estimates and clock time settings are much smaller. The current study investigated this seemingly discrepancy. Participants partook in three experiments: parallel setting, clock time estimate and clock time setting, in this order. As the individual parallel settings were used in the subsequent clock time estimate experiment, and the estimated clock times in the clock time setting experiment, the deviations could be compared directly. In all three experiments, the deviations were systematic and idiosyncratic, and consistent with a biasing influence of an egocentric reference frame. However, the deviations in the two clock time experiments were indeed much smaller than in the parallel setting experiment. Task instruction and strengthened focus on an allocentric reference frame are the most likely explanations. These findings provide fundamental insights in the processing of spatial information. Taking these findings into account when designing haptic devices may make these more intuitive.

Highlights

  • Many studies have already shown that human perception of spatial relations is not veridical e.g

  • Substantial evidence is presented that the deviations in the parallel setting experiment are caused by the biasing influence of an egocentric reference frame4,5,7

  • Experimental tasks that seem closely related to the parallel setting task are the clock time estimate12–15 and clock time setting13,14 tasks

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Many studies have already shown that human perception of spatial relations is not veridical e.g.1–6. They found that if the reaching hand had to be rotated more with respect to the allocentric reference frame, the errors became larger They found that the deviations seemed smaller than in the typical parallel setting experiment, even after doubling the deviations to account for the fact that in the clock time estimate experiment only one hand is involved in a trial. Hermens et al. investigated all three experimental tasks, parallel setting, clock time estimate and clock time setting, on a frontoparallel plane They concluded that the deviations in the two clock time experiments were substantially smaller than in the parallel setting experiment and that the direction of the deviations was not consistent over participants. As the sizes of the errors depend so much on participant, this conclusion should be taken with some caution

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call