↓ Skip to main content

Force feedback facilitates multisensory integration during robotic tool use

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, April 2013
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
30 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
91 Mendeley
Title
Force feedback facilitates multisensory integration during robotic tool use
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, April 2013
DOI 10.1007/s00221-013-3526-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ali Sengül, Giulio Rognini, Michiel van Elk, Jane Elizabeth Aspell, Hannes Bleuler, Olaf Blanke

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of force feedback in relation to tool use on the multisensory integration of visuo-tactile information. Participants learned to control a robotic tool through a surgical robotic interface. Following tool-use training, participants performed a crossmodal congruency task, by responding to tactile vibrations applied to their hands, while ignoring visual distractors superimposed on the robotic tools. In the first experiment it was found that tool-use training with force feedback facilitates multisensory integration of signals from the tool, as reflected in a stronger crossmodal congruency effect with the force feedback training compared to training without force feedback and to no training. The second experiment extends these findings by showing that training with realistic online force feedback resulted in a stronger crossmodal congruency effect compared to training in which force feedback was delayed. The present study highlights the importance of haptic information for multisensory integration and extends findings from classical tool-use studies to the domain of robotic tools. We argue that such crossmodal congruency effects are an objective measure of robotic tool integration and propose some potential applications in surgical robotics, robotic tools, and human-tool interaction.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 91 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 3%
India 1 1%
Turkey 1 1%
Italy 1 1%
Unknown 85 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 15 16%
Researcher 14 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 11%
Professor > Associate Professor 8 9%
Other 17 19%
Unknown 13 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 24 26%
Engineering 13 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 10%
Neuroscience 8 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 4%
Other 13 14%
Unknown 20 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 April 2013.
All research outputs
#18,337,420
of 22,708,120 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,473
of 3,218 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,559
of 193,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#35
of 53 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,708,120 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,218 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,472 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 53 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.