| Title |
Can you hear shapes you touch?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Brain Research, February 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00221-010-2178-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jung-Kyong Kim, Robert J. Zatorre |
| Abstract |
Shape is an inherent property of objects existing in both vision and touch but not audition. Can shape then be represented by sound artificially? It has previously been shown that sound can convey visual information by means of image-to-sound coding, but whether sound can code tactile information is not clear. Blindfolded sighted individuals were trained to recognize tactile spatial information using sounds mapped from abstract shapes. After training, subjects were able to match auditory input to tactually discerned shapes and showed generalization to novel auditory-tactile pairings. Furthermore, they showed complete transfer to novel visual shapes, despite the fact that training did not involve any visual exposure. In addition, we found enhanced tactile acuity specific to the training stimuli. The present study demonstrates that as long as tactile space is coded in a systematic way, shape can be conveyed via a medium that is not spatial, suggesting a metamodal representation. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 6% |
| United Kingdom | 3 | 4% |
| France | 3 | 4% |
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 67 | 85% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 25% |
| Researcher | 20 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 15% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 2 | 3% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 27 | 34% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 9 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 8% |
| Engineering | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 8 | 10% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. 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 05 June 2020.
All research outputs
#3,249,805
of 22,653,392 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Brain Research
#260
of 3,214 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#13,046
of 94,056 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Brain Research
#2
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,653,392 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 85th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,214 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 5.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% of its peers.
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 94,056 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.