↓ Skip to main content

Gating of vibrotactile detection during visually guided bimanual reaches

Overview of attention for article published in Experimental Brain Research, October 2009
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Gating of vibrotactile detection during visually guided bimanual reaches
Published in
Experimental Brain Research, October 2009
DOI 10.1007/s00221-009-2050-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gavin Buckingham, David P. Carey, Francisco L. Colino, John deGrosbois, Gordon Binsted

Abstract

It is far more difficult to detect a small tactile stimulation on a finger that is moving compared to when it is static. This suppression of tactile information during motion, known as tactile gating, has been examined in some detail during single-joint movements. However, the existence and time course of this gating has yet to be examined during visually guided multi-joint reaches, where sensory feedback may be paramount. The current study demonstrated that neurologically intact humans are unable to detect a small vibratory stimulus on one of their index fingers during a bimanual reach toward visual targets. By parametrically altering the delay between the visual target onset and the vibration, it was demonstrated that this gating was even apparent before participants started moving. A follow up experiment using electromyography indicated that gating was likely to occur even before muscle activity had taken place. This unique demonstration of tactile gating during a task reliant on visual feedback supports the notion this phenomenon is due to a central command, rather than a masking of sensory signals by afferent processing during movement.

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 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Germany 1 2%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Canada 1 2%
China 1 2%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 59 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 17 27%
Researcher 16 25%
Student > Master 6 9%
Professor 4 6%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 10 16%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 39%
Neuroscience 9 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Sports and Recreations 3 5%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 12 19%
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 17 April 2015.
All research outputs
#18,367,612
of 22,749,166 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#2,475
of 3,220 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,777
of 93,922 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#19
of 23 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,749,166 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 3,220 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. 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 93,922 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 4th percentile – i.e., 4% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 23 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.