Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Georgiou, Theodoros; Edwards, Alistair (2014)
Languages: English
Types: Other

Classified by OpenAIRE into

ACM Ref: ComputingMethodologies_COMPUTERGRAPHICS
Research in the area of haptics and how we perceive the sensations that come from haptic interaction started almost a century ago, yet there is little fundamental knowledge as to how and whether a change in the physical values of one characteristic can alter the perception of another. The increasing availability of haptic interaction through the development of force-feedback devices opened new possibilities in interaction. It allowed for accurate real time change of physical attributes on virtual objects in order to test the haptic perception changes to the human user. An experiment was carried out to ascertain whether a change in the stiffness value would have a\ud noticeable effect on the perceived roughness of a virtual object. Participants were presented with a textured surface and were asked to estimate how rough it felt compared to a standard. What the participants did not know was that the simulated texture on both surfaces remained constant and the only physical attribute changing in every trial was the comparison object’s surface stiffness. The results showed that there is a strong relationship between physical stiffness and perceived roughness that can be accurately described by a power function. Furthermore, the roughness magnitude estimations showed an increase with increasing stiffness values. The conclusion is that there are relationships between these parameters, but that further work is required to validate those relationships.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Bensmaïa, S., & Hollins, M. (2005). Pacinian representations of fine surface texture. Perception & Psychophysics , 67 (5), 842-854.
    • Heller, M. A. (1989). Texture perception in sighted and blind observers. Perception & Psychophysics , 45 (1), 49-54.
    • Hollins, M., & Risner, S. (2000). Evidence for the duplex theory of tactile texture perception. Perception & Psychophysics , 62 (4), 695-705.
    • Kornbrot, D., Penn, P., Petrie, P., Furner, S., & Hardwick, A. (2007). Roughness perception in haptic virtual reality for sighted and blind people. Perception & Psychophysics , 69 (4), 502-512.
    • Lederman, S. J. (1979). Auditory texture perception. Perception , 8 (1), 93-103.
    • Lederman, S. J. (1974). Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces : The touching process and effects of macro- and microsurface structure. Perception & Psychophysics , 16 (2), 385-395.
    • Raspopovic, S., Capogrosso, M., Petrini, F. M., Bonizzato, M., Rigosa, J., Pino, G., et al. (2014). Restoring Natural Sensory Feedback in Real-Time Bidirectional Hand Prostheses. Science Translational Medicine , 6 (222).
    • Robles-De-La-Torre, G. (2006). The importance of the sense of touch in virtual and real environments. IEEE Multimedia , 13, 24-30.
    • SensAble Technologies Inc. (2008). PHANTOM Omni User Manual. Woburn, United States of America: SensAble Technologies Inc.
    • Stevens, S. S. (1971). Issues in psychophysical measurement. Psychological review , 78 (5), 426-450.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article