Electrotactile stimulation on the tongue: Intensity perception, discrimination, and cross-modality estimation

References

• Aiello GL, Valenza MA. Psychophysical response to electrocutaneous stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1984; 31(8)558–560
   Google Scholar
• Anani AB, Ikeda K, Körner LM. Human ability to discriminate various parameters in afferent electrical nerve stimulation with particular reference to prostheses sensory feedback. Med Biol Eng Comput 1977; 15(4)363–373
   Google Scholar
• Appelle S. Visual and haptic angle perception in the matching task. Am J Psychol 1971; 84(4)487–499
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bach-y-Rita P, Tyler ME. Tongue man-machine interface. Medicine Meets Virtual Reality Conf. 2000; 17–19
   Google Scholar
• Bach-y-Rita P, Kaczmarek KA, Tyler ME, Garcia-Lara J. Form perception with a 49-point electrotactile stimulus array on the tongue: A technical note. J Rehabil Res Dev 1998; 35(4)427–430
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bach-y-Rita P, Kercel SW. Sensory substitution and the human–machine interface. Trends Cognit Sci 2003; 7(12)541–546
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baird JC. Sensation and judgment: Complementary theory of psychophysics., SW Link, JT Townsend. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ 1997
   Google Scholar
• Bjorkman M. Relations between Intra-Modal and Cross-Modal Matching. Scand J Psychol 1967; 8(2)65–76
   Google Scholar
• Bobich LR, Warren JP, Sweeney JD, Tillery SI, Santello M. Spatial localization of electrotactile stimuli on the fingertip in humans. Somatosens Mot Res 2007; 24(4)179–188
   Google Scholar
• Braun V, Rogeaux M, Schneid N, O’Mahony M, Rousseau B. Corroborating the 2-AFC and 2-AC Thurstonian models using both a model system and sparkling water. Food Qual Pref 2004; 15(6)501–507
   Google Scholar
• Coren S, Ward LM, Enns JT. Sensation and perception. John Wiley, Hoboken, NJ 2004
   Google Scholar
• Danilov YP, Tyler ME, Skinner KL, Hogle RA, Bach-y-Rita P. Efficacy of electrotactile vestibular substitution in patients with peripheral and central vestibular loss. J Vestib Res 2007; 17(2–3)119–130
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Droessler NJ, Hall DK, Tyler ME, Ferrier NJ (2001) Tongue-based electrotactile feedback to perceive objects grasped by a robotic manipulator: Preliminary results. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society, IstanbulTurkey, October 25–28, 2001. 2: 1404–1407
   Google Scholar
• Durlach NI, Braida LD. Intensity perception. 1. Preliminary theory of intensity resolution. J Acoust Soc Am 1969; 46(2)372–383
   Google Scholar
• Essick GK, Chopra A, Guest S, McGlone F. Lingual tactile acuity, taste perception, and the density and diameter of fungiform papillae in female subjects. Physiol Behav 2003; 80(2–3)289–302
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garcia-Perez MA. Optimal setups for forced-choice staircases with fixed step sizes. Spatial Vision 2000; 13(4)431–448
   Google Scholar
• Garcia-Perez MA. Yes–no staircases with fixed step sizes: Psychometric properties and optimal setup. Optom Vis Sci 2001; 78(1)56–64
   Google Scholar
• Gescheider GA. Psychophysics: Method, theory, and application. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ 1985; 295
   Google Scholar
• Gravetter FJ, Wallnau LB. Statistics for the behavioral sciences. Thomson Wadsworth, New York 2004
   Google Scholar
• Gridgeman NT. Pair comparison, with and without ties. Biometrics 1959; 15(3)382–388
   Google Scholar
• Higashiyama A, Rollman GB. Perceived locus and intensity of electrocutaneous stimulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1991; 38(7)679–686
   Google Scholar
• Johansson RS, Vallbo AB. Tactile sensibility in the human hand: Relative and absolute densities of four types of mechanoreceptive units in glabrous skin. J Physiol 1979; 286: 283–300
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson KO, Yoshioka T, Vega-Bermudez F. Tactile functions of mechanoreceptive afferents innervating the hand. J Clin Neurophysiol 2000; 17(6)539–558
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jou J, Leka GE, Rogers DM, Matus YE. Contraction bias in memorial quantifying judgment: Does it come from a stable compressed memory representation or a dynamic adaptation process?. Am J Psychol 2004; 117(4)543–564
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek K, Bach-y-Rita P. Tactile displays. Virtual environments and advanced interface design. Oxford University Press, New York 1995; 349–414
   Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek K, Tyler ME, Bach-y-Rita P. Pattern identification on a fingertip-scanned electrotactile display. Proceedings of the 19th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Chicago, IL 1997; 1694–1697, 1997 Oct 30–Nov 2
   Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek K, Webster JG, Radwin RG. Periodic variations in the electrotactile sensation threshold. Proc Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc, Philadelphia, PA 1990
   Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA. Electrotactile adaptation on the abdomen: Preliminary results. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8(4)499–505
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Haase SJ. Pattern identification and perceived stimulus, quality as a function of stimulation waveform on a fingertip-scanned electrotactile display. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2003; 11(1)9–16
   Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Tyler ME, Brisben AJ, Johnson KO. The afferent neural response to electrotactile stimuli: Preliminary results. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 2000; 8(2)268–270
   Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Webster JG, Bachyrita P, Tompkins WJ. Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1991; 38(1)1–16
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Webster JG, Radwin RG. Maximal dynamic range electrotactile stimulation waveforms. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1992; 39(7)701–715
   Google Scholar
• Kajimoto H, Kawakami N, Tachi S. Electro-tactile display with tactile primary color approach. International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. In: Systems IRIColRa, editor., Sendai International Center, SendaiJapan 2004
   Google Scholar
• Kandel ER, Schwartz JH, Jessell TM. Principles of neural science. McGraw-Hill, New York 2000
   Google Scholar
• Kato I, Kumamato S, Tamura S, Tsunekawa Y. Human cognitional ability for electric stimulation signals. Advances in external control of human extremities, D Popovic. Dubrovnik. 1970; 69–84
   Google Scholar
• Kreft HA, Donaldson GS, Nelson DA. Effects of pulse rate and electrode array design on intensity discrimination in cochlear implant users. J Acoust Soc Am 2004; 116(4)2258–2268
   Google Scholar
• Liu W, Tang H. An initial study on lip perception of electrotactile array stimulation. J Rehabil Res Dev 2005; 42(5)705–714
   Google Scholar
• Maeyama T, Plattig KH. Minimal two-point discrimination in human tongue and palate. Am J Otolaryngol 1989; 10(5)342–344
   Google Scholar
• Marlow CD, Winkelma RK, Gibilisc JA. General sensory innervation of human tongue. Anat Rec 1965; 152(4)503–512
   Google Scholar
• Menia LL, Van Doren CL. Independence of pitch and loudness of an electrocutaneous stimulus for sensory feedback. IEEE Trans Rehabil Eng 1994; 2(4)197–205
   Google Scholar
• Miller GA. The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for information processing. Psychological Review 1956; 63(2)81–97
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monkman GF, Egersdorfer S, Meier A, Bose H, Baumann M, Ermert H, Kahled W, Freimuth H. Technologies for haptic displays in teleoperation. Ind Robot Int J 2003; 30(6)525–530
   Google Scholar
• Moyer RS, Bradley DR, Sorensen MH, Whiting JC, Mansfield DP. Psychophysical functions for perceived and remembered size. Science 1978; 200(4339)330–332
   Google Scholar
• Mueller EE, Loeffel R, Mead S. Skin impedance in relation to pain threshold testing by electrical means. J Appl Physiol 1953; 5(12)746–752
   Google Scholar
• Nelson DA, Schmitz JL, Donaldson GS, Viemeister NF, Javel E. Intensity discrimination as a function of stimulus level with electric stimulation. J Acoust Soc Am 1996; 100(4)2393–2414
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfingst BE, Burnett PA, Sutton D. Intensity discrimination with cochlear implants. J Acoust Soc Am 1983; 73(4)1283–1292
   Google Scholar
• Picard C, Olivier A. Sensory cortical tongue representation in man. J Neurosurg 1983; 59(5)781–789
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pleasonton AK. Sensitivity of the tongue to electrical stimulation. J Speech Hear Res 1970; 13(3)635–644
   Google Scholar
• Ptito M, Moesgaard SM, Gjedde A, Kupers R. Cross-modal plasticity revealed by electrotactile stimulation of the tongue in the congenitally blind. Brain 2005; 128: 606–614
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salata JA, Raj JM, Doty RL. Differential sensitivity of tongue areas and palate to electrical stimulation—A suprathreshold cross-modal matching study. Chem Senses 1991; 16(5)483–489
   Google Scholar
• Saunders F, Collins CC. Electrical stimulation of the sense of touch. J Biomed Syst 1971; 2(7)27–37
   Google Scholar
• Stevens SS. Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural, and social prospects. Wiley, New York 1975; 329
   Google Scholar
• Szeto AY, Chung YM. Effects of training on human tracking of electrocutaneous signals. Ann Biomed Eng 1986; 14(4)369–381
   Google Scholar
• Szeto AY, Riso RR. Sensory feedback using electrical stimulation of the tactile sense. Rehabilitation engineering, RV Smith, JH Leslie. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL 1990
   Google Scholar
• Szeto AYJ, Chung YM. Effects of training on electrocutaneous tracking. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 1985; 32(10)888–888
   Google Scholar
• Tang H, Beebe DJ. An oral tactile interface for blind navigation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2006; 14(1)116–123
   Google Scholar
• Tashiro T, Higashiyama A. The perceptual properties of electrocutaneous stimulation: Sensory quality, subjective intensity, and intensity–duration relation. Percept Psychophys 1981; 30(6)579–586
   Google Scholar
• Trulsson M, Essick GK. Low-threshold mechanoreceptive afferents in the human lingual nerve. J Neurophysiol 1997; 77(2)737–748
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler ME, Danilov Y, Bachyrita P. Closing an open-loop control system: Vestibular substitution through the tongue. J Integr Neurosci 2003; 2(2)159–164
   Google Scholar
• Vanboven RW, Johnson KO. The limit of tactile spatial resolution in humans—Grating orientation discrimination at the lip, tongue, and finger. Neurology 1994; 44(12)2361–2366
   Google Scholar
• Von Békésy G. Experiments in hearing. McGraw-Hill, New York 1960; 745
   Google Scholar
• Vuillerme N, Pinsault N, Chenu O, Demongeot J, Payan Y, Danilov Y. Sensory supplementation system based on electrotactile tongue biofeedback of head position for balance control. Neurosci Lett 2008; 431(3)206–210
   Google Scholar
• Warren JP, Bobich LR, Santello M, Sweeney JD, Tillery SIH. Receptive field characteristics under electrotactile stimulation of the fingertip. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng 2008; 16(4)410–415
   Google Scholar
• Weinstein S. Intensive and extensive aspects of tactile sensitivity as a function of body part, sex, and laterality. The skin senses, DR Kenshalo. Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL 1968; 195–222
   Google Scholar
• Woodworth RS, Schlosberg H. Experimental psychology. Holt, New York 1954; 948
   Google Scholar