↓ Skip to main content

Imposed visual feedback delay of an action changes mass perception based on the sensory prediction error

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
33 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
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
Imposed visual feedback delay of an action changes mass perception based on the sensory prediction error
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00760
Pubmed ID
Authors

Takuya Honda, Nobuhiro Hagura, Toshinori Yoshioka, Hiroshi Imamizu

Abstract

While performing an action, the timing of when the sensory feedback is given can be used to establish the causal link between the action and its consequence. It has been shown that delaying the visual feedback while carrying an object makes people feel the mass of the object to be greater, suggesting that the feedback timing can also impact the perceived quality of an external object. In this study, we investigated the origin of the feedback timing information that influences the mass perception of the external object. Participants made a straight reaching movement while holding a manipulandum. The movement of the manipulandum was presented as a cursor movement on a monitor. In Experiment 1, various delays were imposed between the actual trajectory and the cursor movement. The participants' perceived mass of the manipulandum significantly increased as the delay increased to 400 ms, but this gain did not reach significance when the delay was 800 ms. This suggests the existence of a temporal tuning mechanism for incorporating the visual feedback into the perception of mass. In Experiment 2, we examined whether the increased mass perception during the visual delay was due to the prediction error of the visual consequence of an action or to the actual delay of the feedback itself. After the participants adapted to the feedback delay, the perceived mass of the object became lighter than before, indicating that updating the temporal prediction model for the visual consequence diminishes the overestimation of the object's mass. We propose that the misattribution of the visual delay into mass perception is induced by the sensorimotor prediction error, possibly when the amount of delay (error) is within the range that can reasonably include the consequence of an action.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 3%
Unknown 32 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 27%
Researcher 8 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 15%
Student > Bachelor 3 9%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 5 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 8 24%
Psychology 7 21%
Neuroscience 7 21%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 3%
Computer Science 1 3%
Other 4 12%
Unknown 5 15%
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 23 October 2013.
All research outputs
#17,700,887
of 22,727,570 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,258
of 29,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,218
of 280,760 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#756
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,727,570 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,546 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 280,760 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.