Vibrotactile Frequency Characteristics as Determined by Adaptation and Masking Procedures

  • George A. Gescheider
  • Ronald T. Verrillo

Abstract

It is a well established fact that when all the smallest contactors are used to stimulate glabrous or hairy skin the vibrotactile threshold is a U-shaped function of frequency with the lowest values at approximately 250–300 Hz (Bekesy, 1939; Gescheider, 1976; Gilmer, 1935; Hugony, 1935; Sherrick, 1953; Verrillo, 1962, 1963, 1966a), In some of these studies there was a tendency for the psychophysical threshold curve to become flat at low frequencies. The sharpest discontinuities in the threshold function were first reported by Verrillo (1963). When vibration was applied to the thenar eminence of the hand for 1.0 sec through contactors that were 2.9 cm2 or larger, the function was flat out to 40 Hz whereupon threshold began to decrease at a rate of 12 dB/octave until maximum sensitivity was reached at approximately 250 Hz.

Keywords

Peri Dura Cali 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bekesy, G. von. Uber die Vibrationsempfindung. Akustische Zeit schrift, 1939, 316–334.Google Scholar
  2. Cauna, N. The effects of aging on the receptor organs of the human dermis. In W. Montagna (Ed.), Advances in biology of skin (Vol. 6 ), Aging. New York: Pergamon, 1965.Google Scholar
  3. Frisina, R. D., & Gescheider, G. A. Comparison of child and adult vibrotactile thresholds as a function of frequency and duration. Perception and Psychophysics, 1977, 22, 100–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gescheider, G. A. Evidence in support of the duplex theory of mechanoreception. Sensory Processes, 1976, 1, 68–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Gescheider, G. A., Capraro, A. J., Frisina, R. D., Hamer, R. D., & Verrillo, R. T. A comparison of vibrotactile thresholds measured with and without rigit surround. Sensory Processes, 1978, 2, 99–115.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Gescheider, G. A., Herman, D. D., & Phillips, J. N. Criterion shifts in the measurement of tactile masking. Perception and Psychophysics, 1970, 8, 433–436.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Gescheider, G. A., Verrillo, R. T., Capraro, A. J., & Hamer, R. D. Enhancement of vibrotactile sensation magnitude and predictions from the duplex model of mechanoreception. Sensory Processes, 1977, 1, 187–203.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Gilmer, B. von H. The measurement of the sensitivity of the skin to mechanical vibration. Journal of General Psychology, 1935, 13, 36–61.Google Scholar
  9. Hugony, A. Uber die Empfindung von Schwingungen mittels des Tast-sinner. Zeitschrift fur Biologie, 1935, 96, 548–553.Google Scholar
  10. Kiang, N. Y. S. Discharge patterns of single fibers in the catTs auditory nerve. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1965.Google Scholar
  11. Labs, S. M. Psychophysical tuning curves in vibrotaction. Un-published Masters Thesis, Loyola University of Chicago, 1978.Google Scholar
  12. Labs, S. M., Gescheider, G. A., Fay, R. R., & Lyons, C. Psycho-physical tuning curves in vibrotaction. (submitted for publication).Google Scholar
  13. Lindblom, U. Properties of touch receptors in distal glabrous skin of the monkey. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1965, 28, 966–985.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lindblom, U. The relationship of skin displacement of receptor activation. In A.V.S. deReuck & J. Knight (Eds.), Touch, heat, and pain. Boston: Little, Brown, 1966.Google Scholar
  15. Lindblom, U., & Lund, L. The discharge from vibration-sensitive receptors in the monkey foot. Experimental Neurology, 1966, 15, 401–417.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lowenstein, W. R., & Rathkamp, R. The sites for mechanoelectric conversion in a Pacinian corpuscle. Journal of General Physiology, 1958, 41, 1245–1265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Mendelson, M., & Lowenstein, W. R. Mechanisms of receptor adaptation. Science, 1964, 144, 554–555.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mountcastle, V. B., LaMotte, R. H., & Carli, G. Detection thresholds for stimuli in humans and in monkeys: Comparison with threshold events in mechanoreceptive afferent fibers innervating the monkey hand. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1972, 35, 122–136.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Sato, M. Response of Pacinian corpuscles to sinusoidal vibration. Journal of Physiology (London), 1961, 159, 391–409.Google Scholar
  20. Sherrick, C. E. Variables affecting sensitivity of the human skin to mechanical vibration. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1953, 45, 273–282.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Talbot, W. H., Darian-Smith, I., Kornhuber, H. H., & Mountcastle, V. B. The sense of flutter-vibration: Comparison of the human capacity with response patterns of mechanoreceptive afferents from the monkey hand. Journal of Neurophysiology, 1968, 31, 301–334.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Verrillo, R. T. Investigation of some parameters of the cutaneous threshold for vibration. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1962, 34, 1768–1773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Verrillo, R. T. Effect of contactor area on the vibrotactile threshold. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 1963, 35, 1962–1966.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Verrillo, R. T. Effect of spatial parameters in the vibrotactile threshold. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966a, 71, 570–575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Verrillo, R. T. Vibrotactile sensitivity and the frequency response of Pacinian corpuscles. Psychonomic Science, 1966b, 135–136.Google Scholar
  26. Verrillo, R. T. Specificity in a cutaneous receptor. Perception and Psycho physics, 1966c, 1, 149–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Verrillo, R. T. Comparison of child and adult vibrotactile thresholds. Psychonomic Bulletin, 1977a, 9, 197–200.Google Scholar
  28. Verrillo, R. T. Effects of age on vibrotactile thresholds and on receptor morphology. Paper presented at the 18th annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Washington, D. C., 1977b.Google Scholar
  29. Verrillo, R. T., & Gescheider, G. A. Effect of prior stimulation on vibrotactile thresholds. Sensory Processes, 1977, 1, 191–300.Google Scholar
  30. Zwicker, E. On a psychoacoustical equivalent of tuning curves. In E. Zwicker & E. Terhardt (Eds.), Facts and models in hearing. New York: Springer, 1974.Google Scholar
  31. ReferencesGoogle Scholar
  32. Andres, K. H. & During, M. von. Morphology of cutaneous receptors. In A. Iggo (Ed.), Handbook of sensory physiology,(Vol. 2 ): Somatosensory system. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1973.Google Scholar
  33. Cauna, N. The effects of aging on the receptor organs of the human dermis. In W. Montagna (Ed.), Advances in biology of skin (Vol. 6 ): Aging. New York: Pergamon, 1965.Google Scholar
  34. Gardner, E. Decrease in neurons with age. Anatomical Record, 1940, 77, 529–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Loewenstein, W. R. & Skalak, R. Mechanical transmission in a Pacinian corpuscle. Journal of Physiology (London), 1966, 182, 346–378.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • George A. Gescheider
    • 1
  • Ronald T. Verrillo
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyHamilton CollegeClintonUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Sensory ResearchSyracuse UniversitySyracuseUSA

Personalised recommendations