↓ Skip to main content

Learning not to feel: reshaping the resolution of tactile perception

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
1 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Learning not to feel: reshaping the resolution of tactile perception
Published in
Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnsys.2013.00029
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mohsen Omrani, Armin Lak, Mathew E. Diamond

Abstract

We asked whether biased feedback during training could cause human subjects to lose perceptual acuity in a vibrotactile frequency discrimination task. Prior to training, we determined each subject's vibration frequency discrimination capacity on one fingertip, the Just Noticeable Difference (JND). Subjects then received 850 trials in which they performed a same/different judgment on two vibrations presented to that fingertip. They gained points whenever their judgment matched the computer-generated feedback on that trial. Feedback, however, was biased: the probability per trial of "same" feedback was drawn from a normal distribution with standard deviation twice as wide as the subject's JND. After training, the JND was significantly widened: stimulus pairs previously perceived as different were now perceived as the same. The widening of the JND extended to the untrained hand, indicating that the decrease in resolution originated in non-topographic brain regions. In sum, the acuity of subjects' sensory-perceptual systems shifted in order to match the feedback received during training.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Australia 2 5%
United States 1 3%
Canada 1 3%
Unknown 33 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 27%
Researcher 8 22%
Student > Master 4 11%
Professor 4 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 8%
Other 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 22%
Neuroscience 8 22%
Engineering 7 19%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 11%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Other 6 16%
Unknown 2 5%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 July 2014.
All research outputs
#13,891,799
of 22,713,403 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#794
of 1,339 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#164,390
of 280,747 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Systems Neuroscience
#50
of 95 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,713,403 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,339 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 280,747 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 95 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.