Time course of information processing in visual and haptic object classification

Jasna Martinovic, Rebecca Lawson, Matt Craddock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

15 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Vision identifies objects rapidly and efficiently. In contrast, object recognition by touch is much slower. Furthermore, haptics usually serially accumulates information from different parts of objects, whereas vision typically processes object information in parallel. Is haptic object identification slower simply due to sequential information acquisition and the resulting memory load or due to more fundamental processing differences between the senses? To compare the time course of visual and haptic object recognition, we slowed visual processing using a novel, restricted viewing technique. In an electroencephalographic (EEG) experiment, participants discriminated familiar, nameable from unfamiliar, unnamable objects both visually and haptically. Analyses focused on the evoked and total fronto-central theta-band (5-7¿Hz; a marker of working memory) and the occipital upper alpha-band (10-12¿Hz; a marker of perceptual processing) locked to the onset of classification. Decreases in total upper alpha-band activity for haptic identification of objects indicate a likely processing role of multisensory extrastriate areas. Long-latency modulations of alpha-band activity differentiated between familiar and unfamiliar objects in haptics but not in vision. In contrast, theta-band activity showed a general increase over time for the slowed-down visual recognition task only. We conclude that haptic object recognition relies on common representations with vision but also that there are fundamental differences between the senses that do not merely arise from differences in their speed of processing.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)49
JournalFrontiers in Human Neuroscience
Volume6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 23 Mar 2012

Fingerprint

Automatic Data Processing
Touch
Short-Term Memory
Recognition (Psychology)

Keywords

  • vision
  • haptics
  • object classification
  • EEG
  • alpha-band activity
  • theta-band activity

Cite this

Time course of information processing in visual and haptic object classification. / Martinovic, Jasna; Lawson, Rebecca; Craddock, Matt.

In: Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, Vol. 6, 23.03.2012, p. 49.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{08809424906346b0af94f810a30e45ed,
title = "Time course of information processing in visual and haptic object classification",
abstract = "Vision identifies objects rapidly and efficiently. In contrast, object recognition by touch is much slower. Furthermore, haptics usually serially accumulates information from different parts of objects, whereas vision typically processes object information in parallel. Is haptic object identification slower simply due to sequential information acquisition and the resulting memory load or due to more fundamental processing differences between the senses? To compare the time course of visual and haptic object recognition, we slowed visual processing using a novel, restricted viewing technique. In an electroencephalographic (EEG) experiment, participants discriminated familiar, nameable from unfamiliar, unnamable objects both visually and haptically. Analyses focused on the evoked and total fronto-central theta-band (5-7¿Hz; a marker of working memory) and the occipital upper alpha-band (10-12¿Hz; a marker of perceptual processing) locked to the onset of classification. Decreases in total upper alpha-band activity for haptic identification of objects indicate a likely processing role of multisensory extrastriate areas. Long-latency modulations of alpha-band activity differentiated between familiar and unfamiliar objects in haptics but not in vision. In contrast, theta-band activity showed a general increase over time for the slowed-down visual recognition task only. We conclude that haptic object recognition relies on common representations with vision but also that there are fundamental differences between the senses that do not merely arise from differences in their speed of processing.",
keywords = "vision, haptics, object classification, EEG, alpha-band activity, theta-band activity",
author = "Jasna Martinovic and Rebecca Lawson and Matt Craddock",
year = "2012",
month = "3",
day = "23",
doi = "10.3389/fnhum.2012.00049",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "49",
journal = "Frontiers in Human Neuroscience",
issn = "1662-5161",
publisher = "Frontiers Media S.A.",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Time course of information processing in visual and haptic object classification

AU - Martinovic, Jasna

AU - Lawson, Rebecca

AU - Craddock, Matt

PY - 2012/3/23

Y1 - 2012/3/23

N2 - Vision identifies objects rapidly and efficiently. In contrast, object recognition by touch is much slower. Furthermore, haptics usually serially accumulates information from different parts of objects, whereas vision typically processes object information in parallel. Is haptic object identification slower simply due to sequential information acquisition and the resulting memory load or due to more fundamental processing differences between the senses? To compare the time course of visual and haptic object recognition, we slowed visual processing using a novel, restricted viewing technique. In an electroencephalographic (EEG) experiment, participants discriminated familiar, nameable from unfamiliar, unnamable objects both visually and haptically. Analyses focused on the evoked and total fronto-central theta-band (5-7¿Hz; a marker of working memory) and the occipital upper alpha-band (10-12¿Hz; a marker of perceptual processing) locked to the onset of classification. Decreases in total upper alpha-band activity for haptic identification of objects indicate a likely processing role of multisensory extrastriate areas. Long-latency modulations of alpha-band activity differentiated between familiar and unfamiliar objects in haptics but not in vision. In contrast, theta-band activity showed a general increase over time for the slowed-down visual recognition task only. We conclude that haptic object recognition relies on common representations with vision but also that there are fundamental differences between the senses that do not merely arise from differences in their speed of processing.

AB - Vision identifies objects rapidly and efficiently. In contrast, object recognition by touch is much slower. Furthermore, haptics usually serially accumulates information from different parts of objects, whereas vision typically processes object information in parallel. Is haptic object identification slower simply due to sequential information acquisition and the resulting memory load or due to more fundamental processing differences between the senses? To compare the time course of visual and haptic object recognition, we slowed visual processing using a novel, restricted viewing technique. In an electroencephalographic (EEG) experiment, participants discriminated familiar, nameable from unfamiliar, unnamable objects both visually and haptically. Analyses focused on the evoked and total fronto-central theta-band (5-7¿Hz; a marker of working memory) and the occipital upper alpha-band (10-12¿Hz; a marker of perceptual processing) locked to the onset of classification. Decreases in total upper alpha-band activity for haptic identification of objects indicate a likely processing role of multisensory extrastriate areas. Long-latency modulations of alpha-band activity differentiated between familiar and unfamiliar objects in haptics but not in vision. In contrast, theta-band activity showed a general increase over time for the slowed-down visual recognition task only. We conclude that haptic object recognition relies on common representations with vision but also that there are fundamental differences between the senses that do not merely arise from differences in their speed of processing.

KW - vision

KW - haptics

KW - object classification

KW - EEG

KW - alpha-band activity

KW - theta-band activity

U2 - 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00049

DO - 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00049

M3 - Article

C2 - 22470327

VL - 6

SP - 49

JO - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

JF - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience

SN - 1662-5161

ER -