↓ Skip to main content

The impact of using an upper-limb prosthesis on the perception of real and illusory weight differences

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

news
5 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
29 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
62 Mendeley
Title
The impact of using an upper-limb prosthesis on the perception of real and illusory weight differences
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, January 2018
DOI 10.3758/s13423-017-1425-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gavin Buckingham, Johnny Parr, Greg Wood, Samuel Vine, Pan Dimitriou, Sarah Day

Abstract

Little is known about how human perception is affected using an upper-limb prosthesis. To shed light on this topic, we investigated how using an upper-limb prosthesis affects individuals' experience of object weight. First, we examined how a group of upper-limb amputee prosthetic users experienced real mass differences and illusory weight differences in the context of the 'size-weight' illusion. Surprisingly, the upper-limb prosthetic users reported a markedly smaller illusion than controls, despite equivalent perceptions of a real mass difference. Next, we replicated this dissociation between real and illusory weight perception in a group of nonamputees who lifted the stimuli with an upper-limb myoelectric prosthetic simulator, again noting that the prosthetic users experienced illusory, but not real, weight differences as being weaker than controls. These findings not only validate the use of a prosthetic simulator as an effective tool for investigating perception and action but also highlight a surprising dissociation between the perception of real and illusory weight differences.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 29 X users 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 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 62 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 11 18%
Student > Bachelor 9 15%
Student > Master 9 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 15%
Student > Postgraduate 4 6%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 14 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 14 23%
Psychology 11 18%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 8%
Sports and Recreations 5 8%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 15 24%