The (in)effectiveness of anticipatory vibrotactile cues in mitigating motion sickness

The introduction of (fully) automated vehicles has generated a re-interest in motion sickness, given that passengers suffer much more from motion sickness compared to car drivers. A suggested solution is to improve the anticipation of passive self-motion via cues that alert passengers of changes in the upcoming motion trajectory. We already know that auditory or visual cues can mitigate motion sickness. In this study, we used anticipatory vibrotactile cues that do not interfere with the (audio)visual tasks passengers may want to perform. We wanted to investigate (1) whether anticipatory vibrotactile cues mitigate motion sickness, and (2) whether the timing of the cue is of influence. We therefore exposed participants to four sessions on a linear sled with displacements unpredictable in motion onset. In three sessions, an anticipatory cue was presented 0.33, 1, or 3 s prior to the onset of forward motion. Using a new pre-registered measure, we quantified the reduction in motion sickness across multiple sickness scores in these sessions relative to a control session. Under the chosen experimental conditions, our results did not show a significant mitigation of motion sickness by the anticipatory vibrotactile cues, irrespective of their timing. Participants yet indicated that the cues were helpful. Considering that motion sickness is influenced by the unpredictability of displacements, vibrotactile cues may mitigate sickness when motions have more (unpredictable) variability than those studied here.

Self-motion perception without sensory motion

Various studies have demonstrated a role for cognition on self-motion perception. Those studies all concerned modulations of the perception of a physical or visual motion stimulus. In our study, however, we investigated whether cognitive cues could elicit a percept of oscillatory self-motion in the absence of sensory motion. If so, we could use this percept to investigate if the resulting mismatch between estimated self-motion and a lack of corresponding sensory signals is motion sickening. To that end, we seated blindfolded participants on a swing that remained motionless during two conditions, apart from a deliberate perturbation at the start of each condition. The conditions only differed regarding instructions, a secondary task and a demonstration, which suggested either a quick halt (“Distraction”) or continuing oscillations of the swing (“Focus”). Participants reported that the swing oscillated with larger peak-to-peak displacements and for a longer period of time in the Focus condition. That increase was not reflected in the reported motion sickness scores, which did not differ between the two conditions. As the reported motion was rather small, the lack of an effect on the motion sickness response can be explained by assuming a subthreshold neural conflict. Our results support the existence of internal models relevant to sensorimotor processing and the potential of cognitive (behavioral) therapies to alleviate undesirable perceptual issues to some extent. We conclude that oscillatory self-motion can be perceived in the absence of related sensory stimulation, which advocates for the acknowledgement of cognitive cues in studies on self-motion perception.

How feelings of unpleasantness develop during the progression of motion sickness symptoms

To mitigate motion sickness in self-driving cars and virtual reality, one should be able to quantify its progression unambiguously. Self-report rating scales either focus on general feelings of unpleasantness or specific symptomatology. Although one generally feels worse as symptoms progress, there is anecdotal evidence suggesting a non-monotonic relationship between unpleasantness and symptomatology. This implies that individuals could (temporarily) feel better as symptoms progress, which could trouble an unambiguous measurement of motion sickness progression. Here we explicitly investigated the temporal development of both unpleasantness and symptomatology using subjective reports, as well as their mutual dependence using psychophysical scaling techniques. We found symptoms to manifest in a fixed order, while unpleasantness increased non-monotonically. Later manifesting symptoms were generally judged as more unpleasant, except for a reduction at the onset of nausea, which corresponded to feeling better. Although we cannot explicate the origin of this reduction, its existence is of importance to the quantification of motion sickness. Specifically, the reduction at nausea onset implies that rating how bad someone feels does not give you an answer to the question of how close someone is to the point of vomiting. We conclude that unpleasantness can unambiguously be inferred from symptomatology, but an ambiguity exists when inferring symptomatology from unpleasantness. These results speak in favor of rating symptomatology when prioritizing an unambiguous quantification of motion sickness progression.

Accuracy of Intercepting Moving Tactile Targets

When intercepting a moving target, we typically rely on vision to determine where the target is and where it will soon be. The accuracy of visually guided interception can be represented by a model that combines the perceived position and velocity of the target to estimate when and where to hit it and guides the finger accordingly with a short delay. We might expect the accuracy of interception to similarly depend on haptic judgments of position and velocity. To test this, we conducted separate experiments to measure the precision and any biases in tactile perception of position and velocity and used our findings to predict the precision and biases that would be present in an interception task if it were performed according to the principle described earlier. We then performed a tactile interception task to test our predictions. We found that interception of tactile targets is guided by similar principles as interception of visual targets.

Holding an Object: Kinesthesia Does Not Influence the Visually Perceived Size

Because of the inverse relationship between an object's distance and its retinal image size, visual judgments of size require information on distance. Holding an object can obviously influence where one considers it to be. Does kinesthetic information on the posture of one's arm influence visual judgments of the object's size?

Subjects were given a 5 cm cube at which they were asked to look before the experiment started, and to hold under the table in their left hand during the experiment. In their right hand, they held a rod behind a mirror. A simulated cube was presented binocularly—at the tip of the rod—via the mirror. Each presentation started with the subject placing the rod somewhere on a surface behind the mirror. The simulated cube appeared at that position (or 2.5 cm closer or further away) for 4 s, after which the subject had to indicate whether the cube he/she had seen was larger, the same, or smaller than the reference. The size of the simulated cube was varied between trials.

Whether the simulated cube was closer, at the same position, or further than the rod influenced the point of subjective equality (the size of the simulation at which subjects judged it to match the reference). However, the average distance between the subject and the simulation was also different. When the latter differences were taken into account (by selecting data with the same average distance between the subject and the simulation) the abovementioned influence of the distance between the rod and the simulated cube disappeared.

Ultra-fast selection of grasping points

To grasp an object one needs to determine suitable positions on its surface for placing the digits and to move the digits to those positions. If the object is displaced during a reach-to-grasp movement, the digit movements are quickly adjusted. Do these fast adjustments only guide the digits to previously chosen positions on the surface of the object, or is the choice of contact points also constantly reconsidered? Subjects grasped a ball or a cube that sometimes rotated briefly when the digits started moving. The digits followed the rotation within 115 ms. When the object was a ball, subjects quickly counteracted the initial following response by reconsidering their choice of grasping points so that the digits ended at different positions on the rotated surface of the ball, and the ball was grasped with the preferred orientation of the hand. When the object was a cube, subjects sometimes counteracted the initial following response to grasp the cube by a different pair of sides. This altered choice of grasping points was evident within ∼160 ms of rotation onset, which is shorter than regular reaction times.

Studying the role of vision in cycling: critique on restricting research to fixation behaviour

In a recent study published in Accident Analysis & Prevention, Vansteenkiste et al. (2013)--as one of the first in this field--investigated the visual control of bicycle steering. They undertook the interesting task of testing cyclists' eye fixation behaviour against Donges' two-level model of steering, i.e. the guidance level to anticipate alternations in the course of the road and the stabilization level for lane keeping. Although the laboratory experiment itself is well conducted, we believe that its results cannot be used to test the two-level model of steering as developed for driving. The test track was only 15m long, was completely straight and was known in advance. Accordingly, it did not provide adequate conditions for testing the guidance level. Furthermore, as the experimental lanes were much narrower than real-world cycling lanes, the stabilization level differed considerably from that in the real world. The study by Vansteenkiste et al. (2013) may provide valuable insight into the role of vision in 'precision steering', but, as we discuss in the paper, more elaborate research paradigms are needed to achieve more comprehensive knowledge of the role of vision in real-world cycling and cycling safety.

Alignment to natural and imposed mismatches between the senses

Does the nervous system continuously realign the senses so that objects are seen and felt in the same place? Conflicting answers to this question have been given. Research imposing a sensory mismatch has provided evidence that the nervous system realigns the senses to reduce the mismatch. Other studies have shown that when subjects point with the unseen hand to visual targets, their end points show visual-proprioceptive biases that do not disappear after episodes of visual feedback. These biases are indicative of intersensory mismatches that the nervous system does not align for. Here, we directly compare how the nervous system deals with natural and imposed mismatches. Subjects moved a hand-held cube to virtual cubes appearing at pseudorandom locations in three-dimensional space. We alternated blocks in which subjects moved without visual feedback of the hand with feedback blocks in which we rendered a cube representing the hand-held cube. In feedback blocks, we rotated the visual feedback by 5° relative to the subject's head, creating an imposed mismatch between vision and proprioception on top of any natural mismatches. Realignment occurred quickly but was incomplete. We found more realignment to imposed mismatches than to natural mismatches. We propose that this difference is related to the way in which the visual information changed when subjects entered the experiment: the imposed mismatches were different from the mismatch in daily life, so alignment started from scratch, whereas the natural mismatches were not imposed by the experimenter, so subjects are likely to have entered the experiment partly aligned.

Relative finger position influences whether you can localize tactile stimuli

To investigate whether the relative positions of the fingers influence tactile localization, participants were asked to localize tactile stimuli applied to their fingertips. We measured the location and rate of errors for three finger configurations: fingers stretched out and together so that they are touching each other, fingers stretched out and spread apart maximally and fingers stretched out with the two hands on top of each other so that the fingers are interwoven. When the fingers contact each other, it is likely that the error rate to the adjacent fingers will be higher than when the fingers are spread apart. In particular, we reasoned that localization would probably improve when the fingers are spread. We aimed at assessing whether such adjacency was measured in external coordinates (taking proprioception into account) or on the body (in skin coordinates). The results confirmed that the error rate was lower when the fingers were spread. However, there was no decrease in error rate to neighbouring fingertips in the fingers spread condition in comparison with the fingers together condition. In an additional experiment, we showed that the lower error rate when the fingers were spread was not related to the continuous tactile input from the neighbouring fingers when the fingers were together. The current results suggest that information from proprioception is taken into account in perceiving the location of a stimulus on one of the fingertips.

The use of proprioception and tactile information in haptic search

To investigate how tactile and proprioceptive information are used in haptic object discrimination we conducted a haptic search task in which participants had to search for either a cylinder, a bar or a rotated cube within a grid of aligned cubes. Tactile information from one finger is enough to detect a cylinder amongst the cubes. For detecting a bar or a rotated cube amongst cubes touch alone is not enough. For the rotated cube this is evident because its shape is identical to that of the non-targets, so proprioception must provide information about the orientation of the fingers and hand when touching it. For the bar one either needs proprioceptive information about the distance and direction of a single finger's movements along the surfaces, or proprioceptive information from several fingers when they touch it simultaneously. When using only one finger, search times for the bar were much longer than those for the other two targets. When the whole hand or both hands were used the search times were similar for all shapes. Most errors were made when searching for the rotated cube, probably due to systematic posture-related biases in judging orientation on the basis of proprioception. The results suggest that tactile and proprioceptive information are readily combined for shape discrimination.

Haptic search is more efficient when the stimulus can be interpreted as consisting of fewer items

In a typical haptic search task, separate items are presented to individual fingertips. The time to find a specific item generally increases with the number of items, but is it the number of items or the number of fingers that determines search time? To find out, we conducted haptic search experiments in which horizontal lines made of swell paper were presented to either two, four or six of the participants' fingertips. The task for the participant was to lift the finger under which they did not feel (part of) a line. In one of the conditions separate non-aligned lines were presented to the fingertips so that the number of items increased with the number of fingers used. In two other conditions the participants had to find an interruption in a single straight line under one of the fingertips. These conditions differed in the size of the gap. If only the number of items in the tactile display were important, search times would increase with the number of fingers in the first condition, but not depend on the number of fingers used in the other two conditions. In all conditions we found that the search time increased with the number of fingers used. However, this increase was smaller in the single line condition in which the gap was large enough for one finger to not make any contact with the line. Thus, the number of fingers involved determines the haptic search time, but search is more efficient when the stimulus can be interpreted as consisting of fewer items.

Haptic search with finger movements: using more fingers does not necessarily reduce search times

Two haptic serial search tasks were used to investigate how the separations between items, and the number of fingers used to scan them, influence the search time and search strategy. In both tasks participants had to search for a target (cross) between a fixed number of non-targets (circles). The items were placed in a straight line. The target's position was varied within blocks, and inter-item separation was varied between blocks. In the first experiment participants used their index finger to scan the display. As expected, search time depended on target position as well as on item separation. For larger separations participants' movements were jerky, resembling 'saccades' and 'fixations', while for the shortest separation the movements were smooth. When only considering time in contact with an item, search times were the same for all separation conditions. Furthermore, participants never continued their movement after they encountered the target. These results suggest that participants did not use the time during which they were moving between the items to process information about the items. The search times were a little shorter than those in a static search experiment (Overvliet et al. in Percept Psychophys, 2007a), where multiple items were presented to the fingertips simultaneously. To investigate whether this is because the finger was moving or because only one finger was stimulated, we conducted a second experiment in which we asked participants to put three fingers in line and use them together to scan the items. Doing so increased the time in contact with the items for all separations, so search times were presumably longer in the static search experiment because multiple fingers were involved. This may be caused by the time that it takes to switch from one finger to the other.

Living up to optimal expectations

Natural visual scenes contain several independent sources of information (cues) about a single property such as slant. It is widely assumed that the visual system processes such cues separately and then combines them with an averaging operation that takes the reliabilities of the individual cues into account. Does that mean that people lose access to information about inconsistencies between the cues, or are all inconsistencies revealed in a distorted surface appearance? To find out, we let observers match the slant and appearance of a simulated test surface to those of an identical, simultaneously visible, simulated reference surface and analyzed the variability in the settings. We also let observers match surfaces under conditions that were manipulated in ways that were expected to favor certain cues (monocular or binocular) or to selectively disrupt certain comparisons between the surfaces (slant or structure). The patterns in the variability between the settings were consistent with predictions based on the use of all available information. We argue that information about discrepancies is only "lost" during cue combination if there is no benefit in retaining the information.

The effects of pause software on the temporal characteristics of computer use

The study investigated the natural work-pause pattern of computer users and the possible effects of imposing pause regimes on this pattern. Hereto, the precise timing of computer events was recorded across a large number of days. It was found that the distribution of the pause durations was extremely skewed and that pauses with twice the duration are twice less likely to occur. The effects of imposing pause regimes were studied by performing a simulation of commercially available pause software. It was found that depending on the duration of the introduced pause, the software added 25-57% of the pauses taken naturally. Analysis of the timing of the introduced pauses revealed that a large number of spontaneous pauses were taken close to the inserted pause. Considering the disappointing results of studies investigating the effects of introducing (active) pauses during computer work, this study has cast doubt on the usefulness of introducing short duration pauses.

Continuous Use of Perceived Velocity While Hitting Running Spiders

From previous studies examining how we hit moving targets we concluded that the speed and the direction of the hand are determined independently, the former being based on the perceived velocity of the target and the latter on its perceived position. It is known that the direction in which the hand moves is continuously adjusted on the basis of the perceived target position, with a delay of about 110 ms. In the present study we examined whether the speed of the hand is also under such continuous control, or whether it is determined in advance.

Subjects were instructed to hit targets (spiders) as quickly as possible with a rod. They were presented with moving targets that appeared at unpredictable moments on a screen in front of them. Some time within 400 ms of their appearing on the screen, the velocity of the target abruptly changed. We found that this influenced the speed with which the rod hit the target as long as the change occurred at least 200 ms before the hit. Considering that the movement time of the hand was more than 200 ms, the perceived velocity must have influenced the speed of the hand during its motion. We conclude that the speed of the hand is continuously adjusted to maintain its relationship with the speed of the target.