scholarly journals Vibrotactile Stimulation to Change Velocity Perception in Automobiles

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (3) ◽  
pp. 177-183 ◽  
Author(s):  
Motoki TACHIIRI ◽  
Yoshihiro TANAKA ◽  
Akihito SANO
Keyword(s):  
Vibrotactile Stimulation ◽  
Velocity Perception

Modulation of Velocity Perception by Engine Vibration While Driving

2021 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-140
Author(s):  
Motoki Tachiiri ◽  
◽  
Yoshihiro Tanaka ◽  
Akihito Sano
Keyword(s):  
Traffic Congestion ◽  
Tactile Stimulation ◽  
Engine Speed ◽  
Psychophysical Experiment ◽  
Vibrotactile Stimulation ◽  
Lower Velocity ◽  
Engine Vibration ◽  
Perception Model ◽  
Velocity Perception ◽  
Velocity Changes

While driving a vehicle, perceiving velocity is important for appropriate operation and is one of the most important factors for preventing collisions and traffic congestion. In contexts where perceiving velocity changes is difficult, such as on an undulating road, the velocity may exceed the speed limit or traffic congestion may occur due to heavy braking to avoid a collision. Hence, we proposed a method of modulating the perception of velocity through tactile stimulation to promote adequate operation for the driver. In contrast to methods using visual and auditory stimulation, this method has advantages of not increasing the visual cognitive load, not disturbing the enjoyment of music, and reliably stimulating the driver. In this study, we constructed a velocity perception model based on vibrotactile stimulation induced by the engine speed and proposed a method of changing the vibrotactile stimulation by altering the shift position of the transmission to modulate the perception of velocity without additional vibration actuators, regardless of the actual velocity. We measured the seat and engine vibration using two different vehicles. The results demonstrated that the peak acceleration frequencies are proportional to engine speed, indicating that the vibration depends upon the engine speed, not the velocity. We implemented a method of changing the shift position in an actual vehicle and verified the feasibility of the method through a psychophysical experiment. The results showed that drivers perceived a higher velocity with increasing engine speed and lower velocity with decreasing engine speed.

Effects of Vibrotactile Stimulation for Sustaining Performance in a Vigilance Task: A Pilot Study

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Robert Arrabito ◽  
Geoffrey Ho ◽  
Behzad Aghaei ◽  
Catherine Burns ◽  
Ming Hou
Keyword(s):  
Pilot Study ◽  
Vigilance Task ◽  
Vibrotactile Stimulation

scholarly journals The acquisition and generalization of fear of touch

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (4) ◽  
pp. 809-819 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emma E. Biggs ◽  
Ann Meulders ◽  
Amanda L. Kaas ◽  
Rainer Goebel ◽  
Johan W. S. Vlaeyen
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Pain ◽  
Stimulus Generalization ◽  
Spontaneous Pain ◽  
The Novel ◽  
Vibrotactile Stimulation ◽  
Differential Acquisition ◽  
New Locations ◽  
Conditioned Responses ◽  
Primary Focus ◽  
Post Hoc

AbstractObjectivesContemporary fear-avoidance models of chronic pain posit that fear of pain, and overgeneralization of fear to non-threatening stimuli is a potential pathway to chronic pain. While increasing experimental evidence supports this hypothesis, a comprehensive investigation requires testing in multiple modalities due to the diversity of symptomatology among individuals with chronic pain. In the present study we used an established tactile fear conditioning paradigm as an experimental model of allodynia and spontaneous pain fluctuations, to investigate whether stimulus generalization occurs resulting in fear of touch spreading to new locations.MethodsIn our paradigm, innocuous touch is presented either paired (predictable context) or unpaired (unpredictable context) with a painful electrocutaneous stimulus (pain-US). In the predictable context, vibrotactile stimulation to the index or little finger was paired with the pain-US (CS+), whilst stimulation of the other finger was never paired with pain (CS−). In the unpredictable context, vibrotactile stimulation to the index and little fingers of the opposite hand (CS1 and CS2) was unpaired with pain, but pain-USs occurred unpredictable during the intertrial interval. During the subsequent generalization phase, we tested the spreading of conditioned responses (self-reported fear of touch and pain expectancy) to the (middle and ring) fingers between the CS+ and CS−, and between the CS1 and CS2.ResultsDifferential fear acquisition was evident in the predictable context from increased self-reported pain expectancy and self-reported fear for the CS + compared to the CS−. However, expectancy and fear ratings to the novel generalization stimuli (GS+ and GS−) were comparable to the responses elicited by the CS−. Participants reported equal levels of pain expectancy and fear to the CS1 and CS2 in the unpredictable context. However, the acquired fear did not spread in this context either: participants reported less pain expectancy and fear to the GS1 and GS2 than to the CS1 and CS2. As in our previous study, we did not observe differential acquisition in the startle responses.ConclusionsWhilst our findings for the acquisition of fear of touch replicate the results from our previous study (Biggs et al., 2017), there was no evidence of fear generalization. We discuss the limitations of the present study, with a primary focus on procedural issues that were further investigated with post-hoc analyses, concluding that the present results do not show support for the hypothesis that stimulus generalization underlies spreading of fear of touch to new locations, and discuss how this may be the consequence of a context change that prevented transfer of acquisition.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document