We performed four experiments to investigate whether people can perceive the length of a target object (a “fish”) that is attached to a freely wielded object (the “fishing pole”) by a length of string, and if so, whether this ability is grounded in the sensitivity of the touch system to invariant mechanical parameters that describe the forces and torques required to move the target object. In particular, we investigated sensitivity to mass, static moment, and rotational inertia—the forces required to keep an object from falling due to gravity, the torque required to keep an object from rotating due to gravity, and the torques required to actively rotate an object in different directions, respectively. We manipulated the length of the target object (Experiment 1), the mass of the target object (Experiment 2), and the mass distribution of the target object (Experiments 3 and 4). Overall, the results of the four experiments showed that participants can perform this task. Moreover, when the task is configured such that it more closely approximates a wielding at a distance task, the ability to do so is grounded in sensitivity to such forces and torques.
AltenhoffB. M.PaganoC. C.KilI.BurgT. C. (2017). Learning to perceive haptic distance-to-break in the presence of friction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 43, 231–244. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000298
2.
ArzamarskiR.IsenhowerR. W.KayB. A.TurveyM. T.MichaelsC. F. (2010). Effects of intention and learning on attention to information in dynamic touch. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72, 721–735. https://doi.org/10.3758/APP.72.3.721
3.
Barac-CikojaD.TurveyM. T. (1991). Perceiving aperture size by striking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 17, 330. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.17.2.330
4.
Barac-CikojaD.TurveyM. T. (1993). Haptically perceiving size at a distance. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122, 347–370.
5.
Barac-CikojaD.TurveyM. T. (1995). Does perceived size depend on perceived distance? An argument from extended haptic perception. Perception & Psychophysics, 57, 216–224. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206508
6.
BurtonG. (1992). Nonvisual judgment of the crossability of path gaps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 698–713. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.18.3.698
BurtonG.CyrJ. (2008). Movements of the cane prior to locomotion judgments: the informer fallacy and the training fallacy versus the role of expectation. In ChebykinO. Y.BednyG. Z.KarwowskiW. (Eds.), Ergonomics and Psychology: Developments in Theory and Practice (pp. 447–459). CRC Press.
BurtonG.TurveyM. T. (1990). Perceiving the lengths of rods that are held but not wielded. Ecological Psychology, 2, 295–324.
11.
CarelloC.FitzpatrickP.TurveyM. T. (1992). Haptic probing: Perceiving the length of a probe and the distance of a surface probed. Perception & Psychophysics, 51, 580–598. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211655
12.
CarelloC.Kinsella-ShawJ.AmazeenE. L.TurveyM. T. (2006). Peripheral neuropathy and object length perception by effortful (dynamic) touch: A case study. Neuroscience Letters, 405, 159–163.
CarelloC.TurveyM. T. (2017). Useful dimensions of haptic perception: 50 years after the senses considered as perceptual systems. Ecological Psychology, 29, 95–121. https://doi.org/10.1080/10407413.2017.1297188
15.
DebatsN. B.van de LangenbergR. W.KingmaI.SmeetsJ. B.BeekP. J. (2010). Exploratory movements determine cue weighting in haptic length perception of handheld rods. Journal of Neurophysiology, 104, 2821–2830. https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.01029.2009
16.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
17.
FitzpatrickP.CarelloC.TurveyM. T. (1994). Eigenvalues of the inertia tensor and exteroception by the “muscular sense”. Neuroscience, 60, 551–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/0306-4522(94)90264-X
18.
HajnalA.FonsecaS.HarrisonS.Kinsella-ShawJ.CarelloC. (2007a). Comparisonof dynamic (effortful) touch by hand and foot. Journal of Motor Behavior, 39, 82–88. https://doi.org/10.3200/JMBR.39.2.82-88
19.
HarrisonS. J.HajnalA.Lopresti-GoodmanS.IsenhowerR. W.Kinsella-ShawJ. M. (2011). Perceiving action-relevant properties of tools through dynamic touch: Effects of mass distribution, exploration style, and intention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 193–206. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020407
20.
HartmanL. S.KilI.PaganoC. C.BurgT. (2016). Investigating haptic distance-to-break using linear and nonlinear materials in a simulated minimally invasive surgery task. Ergonomics, 59, 1171–1181. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2015.1127429
21.
Kinsella-ShawJ. M.TurveyM. T. (1992). Haptic perception of object distance in a single-strand vibratory web. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 625–638. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211700
22.
MangalamM.BartonS. A.WagmanJ. B.FragaszyD. M.NewellK. M. (2017). Perception of the length of an object through dynamic touch is invariant across changes in the medium. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 79, 2499–2509. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-017-1403-9
23.
MangalamM.WagmanJ. B.NewellK. M. (2018). Temperature influences perception of the length of a wielded object via effortful touch. Experimental Brain Research, 236, 505–516. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-017-5148-4
24.
PaganoC. C.CabeP. A. (2003). Constancy in dynamic touch: Length perceived by dynamic touch is invariant over changes in media. Ecological Psychology, 15, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326969ECO1501_01
25.
PaganoC. C.DayB. (2020). Ecological interface design inspired by “the meaningful environment”. In WagmanJ. B.BlauJ. J. C. (Eds.), Perception as information detection: Reflections on Gibson’s ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 37–50). Routledge.
26.
PalatinusZ.Kelty-StephenD. G.Kinsella-ShawJ.CarelloC.TurveyM. T. (2014). Haptic perceptual intent in quiet standing affects multifractal scaling of postural fluctuations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 40, 1808–1818. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037247
27.
PeckA. J.JeffersR. G.CarelloC.TurveyM. T. (1996). Haptically perceiving the length of one rod by means of another. Ecological Psychology, 8, 237–258. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326969eco0803_3
28.
RosenblumL. D. (2010). See what I’m saying: The extraordinary power of our five senses. W. W. Norton.
29.
ShawR. E.BransfordJ. B. (1977). Introduction: Psychological approaches to the problem of knowledge. In ShawR. E.BransfordI. B. (Eds.), Perceiving, acting & knowing (pp. 1–39). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
30.
ShockleyK.CarelloC.TurveyM. T. (2004). Metamers in the haptic perception of heaviness and moveableness. Perception & Psychophysics, 66, 731–742.
31.
SolomonH. Y.TurveyM. T. (1988). Haptically perceiving the distances reachable with hand-held objects. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 14, 404–427. https://doi.org/10.1037//0096-1523.14.3.404
32.
TurveyM. T.BurtonG.AmazeenE. L.ButwillM.CarelloC. (1998). Perceiving the width and height of a hand-held object by dynamic touch. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance, 24, 35–48. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.24.1.35
33.
van de LangenbergR.KingmaI.BeekP. J. (2006). Mechanical invariants are implicated in dynamic touch as a function of their salience in the stimulus flow. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 32(5), 1093–1106.
34.
WagmanJ. B.BlauJ. J. C.DuffrinT. (2023). Perception by effortful touch and a lawful approach to (the evolution of) perceiving and acting. In BrunerE. (Ed.), Cognitive Archaeology, Body Cognition, and the Evolution of Visuospatial Perception. Elsevier Publishing.
35.
WagmanJ. B.ChemeroA. (2014). The End of the debate over extended cognition. In SolymosiT.ShookJ. (Eds.), Neuroscience, neurophilosophy, and pragmatism: Understanding brains at work in the world. (new directions in philosophy and cognitive science) (pp. 105–124). Palgrave Macmillen.
36.
WagmanJ. B.DuffrinT. (2023). Perceiving multiple properties of a single person-probe-surface system. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics83, 1317–1334.
37.
WagmanJ. B.HajnalA. (2014). Task-specificity and anatomical independence in perception of surface properties by means of a wielded object. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 40, 2372–2391. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0000014
38.
WagmanJ. B.HajnalA. (2016). Use your head! Perception of action possibilities by means of an object attached to the head. Experimental Brain Research, 234, 829–836. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-015-4509-0
39.
WagmanJ. B.HartlingS.MasonJ. J. (2020). Selective perception in probing by foot: Perceiving the length of a probe and the distance of a probed surface. Acta Psychologica, 209, 103137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103137
40.
WagmanJ. B.McBrideD. M.TrefzgerA. J. (2008). Perceptual experience and posttest improvements in perceptual accuracy and consistency. Perception & Psychophysics, 70, 1060–1067. https://doi.org/10.3758/PP.70.6.1060
41.
WagmanJ. B.ShockleyK.RileyM. A.TurveyM. T. (2001). Attunement, calibration, and exploration in fast haptic perceptual learning. Journal of Motor Behavior, 33, 323–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222890109601917
