|
|
Raveh, E., Friedman, J., & Portnoy, S. (2018). Evaluation of the effects of adding vibrotactile feedback to myoelectric prosthesis users on performance and visual attention in a dual-task paradigm. Clin Rehabil, 99(11), 2263–2270.
Abstract: Objective: To evaluate the effects of adding vibrotactile feedback to myoelectric prosthesis users on the performance time and visual attention in a dual-task paradigm.
Design: A repeated-measures design with a counterbalanced order of two conditions.
Setting: Laboratory setting.
Subjects: Transradial amputees using a myoelectric prosthesis with normal or corrected eyesight (N=12, median age=65 ± 13 years). Exclusion criteria were orthopedic or neurologic problems.
Interventions: Subjects performed grasping tasks with their prosthesis, while controlling a virtual car on a road with their intact hand. The dual task was performed twice: with and without vibrotactile feedback.
Main measures: Performance time of each of the grasping tasks and gaze behavior, measured by the number of times the subjects shifted their gaze toward their hand, the relative time they applied their attention to the screen, and percentage of error in the secondary task.
Results: The mean performance time was significantly shorter (P=0.024) when using vibrotactile feedback (93.2 ± 9.6 seconds) compared with the performance time measured when vibrotactile feedback was not available (107.8 ± 20.3seconds). No significant differences were found between the two conditions in the number of times the gaze shifted from the screen to the hand, in the time the subjects applied their attention to the screen, and in the time the virtual car was off-road, as a percentage of the total game time
(51.4 ± 15.7 and 50.2 ± 19.5, respectively).
Conclusion: Adding vibrotactile feedback improved performance time during grasping in a dual-task paradigm. Prosthesis users may use vibrotactile feedback to perform better during daily tasks, when multiple cognitive demands are present.
|
|
|
|
Raveh, E., Portnoy, S., & Friedman, J. (2018). Myoelectric Prosthesis Users Improve Performance Time and Accuracy Using Vibrotactile Feedback When Visual Feedback Is Disturbed. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 99(11), 2263–2270.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of adding vibrotactile feedback (VTF) in myoelectric prosthesis users during performance of a functional task when visual feedback is disturbed. DESIGN: A repeated-measures design with a counter-balanced order of 3 conditions. SETTING: Laboratory setting. PARTICIPANTS: Transradial amputees using a myoelectric prosthesis with normal or corrected eyesight (N=12, median age 65+/-13y). Exclusion criteria were orthopedic or neurologic problems. INTERVENTIONS: All participants performed the modified Box and Blocks Test, grasping and manipulating 16 blocks over a partition using their myoelectric prosthesis. This was performed 3 times: in full light, in a dark room without VTF, and in a dark room with VTF. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Performance time, that is, the time needed to transfer 1 block, and accuracy during performance, measured by number of empty grips, empty transitions with no block and block drops from the hand. RESULTS: Significant differences were found in all outcome measures when VTF was added, with improved performance time (4.2 vs 5.3s) and a reduced number of grasping errors (3.0 vs 6.5 empty grips, 1.5 vs 4 empty transitions, 2.0 vs 4.5 block drops). CONCLUSIONS: Adding VTF to myoelectric prosthesis users has positive effects on performance time and accuracy when visual feedback is disturbed.
|
|
|
|
Awasthi, B., Friedman, J., & Williams, M. A. (2011). Processing of low spatial frequency faces at periphery in choice reaching tasks. Neuropsychologia, 49(7), 2136–2141.
Abstract: Various aspects of face processing have been associated with distinct ranges of spatial frequencies. Configural processing of faces depends chiefly on low spatial frequency (LSF) information whereas high spatial frequency (HSF) supports feature based processing. However, it has also been argued that face processing has a foveal-bias (HSF channels dominate the fovea). Here we used reach trajectories as a continuous behavioral measure to study perceptual processing of faces. Experimental stimuli were LSF–HSF hybrids of male and female faces superimposed and were presented peripherally and centrally. Subject reached out to touch a specified sex and their movements were recorded. The reaching trajectories reveal that there is less effect of (interference by) LSF faces at fovea as compared to periphery while reaching to HSF targets. These results demonstrate that peripherally presented LSF information, carried chiefly by magnocellular channels, enables efficient processing of faces, possibly via a retinotectal (subcortical) pathway.
|
|
|
|
Schweitzer, N., Apter, Y., Ben-David, J., Liebermann, D. G., & Parush, A. (1995). A field study of braking reactions during driving II: Minimum driver braking times. Ergonomics, 38(9), 1903–1910.
Abstract: The minimum total braking time (i.e. the braking reaction time plus the accelerator-to-brake movement time) plays an important role in defining a minimum following gap (MFG). This study was designed to obtain a lower limit for this gap. Total braking times (TBT) of a group of 51 male and female young athletes were monitored during real driving conditions. Sudden braking applied by a leading private passenger vehicle initiated the trials. A within-subject design was used to study the effects of different factors on braking time. Individuals performed a series of semi-counterbalanced trials at two following distances (6 and 12 m), two speeds (60 and 80 km/h) and three expectancy stages (naïve driving, partial knowledge, and full knowledge of the forthcoming manoeuvre). A three-way repeated measures ANOVA showed no major effects of ‘speed’, but major effects of the ‘expectancy’ and the ‘distance’ factors. The experiment yielded a mean TBT of 0·678 s (SD = 0·144 s) for trials averaged over distances and speeds in the naïve condition only. The data emphasize the role played by pre-cues in the braking response prior to emergency stops. Both the level of awareness of the forthcoming manoeuvre and the distance between vehicles appear to determine the response time. The descriptive statistics presented may also provide the basis for an objective, acceptable and legally valid minimum time gap for prosecution of ‘careless’ drivers.
|
|
|
|
Liebermann, D. G., Ben-David, J., Schweitzer, N., Apter, Y., & Parush, A. (1995). A field study of braking reactions during driving I: Triggering and modulation. Ergonomics, 38(9), 1894–1902.
Abstract: The present experiment was carried out to explore the response of driving subjects to emergency braking. The field trial consisted of driving behind a leading vehicle while the following drivers' responses were recorded by telemetry. A group of 51 individuals performed a series of trials at two driving speeds (60 and 80km/h), two following distances (6 and 12 m), and two braking conditions (real and dummy braking). Not all of these subjects completed all conditions or the minimum number of trials. The dependent variables were the total braking time (TBT) and its subcomponents: braking reaction time (BRT), and accelerator-to-brake movement time (MT). These data were analysed in three separate three-way ANOVAs with repeated measures on all factors. The results showed that when subjects were not aware of the forthcoming braking, the distance and braking conditions had major effects on all dependent variables. At the shorter following distance drivers reacted and moved faster. Similarly, when the brakes were real compared with dummy (i.e. brake lights only) drivers reacted faster. In addition, drivers reacted to onset of brake lights in 83% of the cases when dummy braking was applied, compared with 97% when real brakes were applied. Speed of driving did not show any significant effects and did not appear to influence the cognitive or attentional set to anticipate an emergency manoeuvre. These findings suggest that changes in angular velocity during optic expansion of the leading vehicle may be used as a cue to modulate braking movement, while onset of brake lights alone may be enough to trigger a ‘ballistic’ preventive response.
|
|
