Individual differences impacting skin deformation and tactile discrimination with compliant elastic surfaces

Individual differences in tactile acuity are observed within and between age cohorts. Such differences in acuity may be attributed to various sources, including aspects of nervous system, skin mechanics, finger size, cognitive and behavioral factors, etc. This work considers individual differences, within a younger cohort of participants, in discriminating compliant surfaces. These participants exhibit a range of finger size and stiffness. Interestingly, both their finger size and stiffness well predict their discriminative performance, where softer/smaller fingers outperform stiffer/larger fingers. Stereo imaging captured biomechanical cues in the skin’s deformation, including contact area and penetration depth, and their change rates. In those individuals with stiffer/larger fingers, who perceptually performed worse, we observed less distinguishable contact areas and eccentricities, compared to softer/smaller fingers. These particular cues well predicted individual differences observed in perceptual discrimination. In comparison, with two other cues, curvature and penetration depth, the imaging readily distinguished the compliant surfaces irrespective of finger stiffness/size, not aligned with discrimination. In conclusion, in passive touch, we find that individuals with softer/smaller fingers were better at discriminating compliances, and that certain skin deformation cues predict individual differences in perception.

[1]  Gregory J. Gerling,et al.  Identifying 3-D spatiotemporal skin deformation cues evoked in interacting with compliant elastic surfaces , 2020, 2020 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS).

[2]  Gregory J. Gerling,et al.  A Standard Methodology to Characterize the Intrinsic Material Properties of Compliant Test Stimuli , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[3]  H. Zahouani,et al.  Static and active tactile perception and touch anisotropy: aging and gender effect , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[4]  J Andrew Pruszynski,et al.  Edge orientation perception during active touch. , 2018, Journal of neurophysiology.

[5]  Steven C. Hauser,et al.  Force-Rate Cues Reduce Object Deformation Necessary to Discriminate Compliances Harder than the Skin , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[6]  Gregory J. Gerling,et al.  Imaging the 3-D deformation of the finger pad when interacting with compliant materials , 2018, 2018 IEEE Haptics Symposium (HAPTICS).

[7]  Masami Iwamoto,et al.  Estimating the influence of age-related changes in skin stiffness on tactile perception for static stimulations , 2018 .

[8]  M. Djaghloul,et al.  Biophysical properties of the human finger for touch comprehension: influences of ageing and gender , 2017, Royal Society Open Science.

[9]  Dumitru Olaru,et al.  Experimental determination of the Young's modulus for the fingers with application in prehension systems for small cylindrical objects , 2016 .

[10]  Yoshichika Baba,et al.  Neurophysiology of Tactile Perception : A Tribute to Steven Hsiao Computational modeling indicates that surface pressure can be reliably conveyed to tactile receptors even amidst changes in skin mechanics , 2016 .

[11]  H. Dinse,et al.  A complementary role of intracortical inhibition in age-related tactile degradation and its remodelling in humans , 2016, Scientific Reports.

[12]  Ferdinando Cannella,et al.  Characterization of nonlinear finger pad mechanics for tactile rendering , 2015, 2015 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC).

[13]  Roger Wattenhofer,et al.  A personal touch: recognizing users based on touch screen behavior , 2012, PhoneSense '12.

[14]  Patrick Baudisch,et al.  The generalized perceived input point model and how to double touch accuracy by extracting fingerprints , 2010, CHI.

[15]  Michael Rohs,et al.  Characteristics of pressure-based input for mobile devices , 2010, CHI.

[16]  D. Goldreich,et al.  Diminutive Digits Discern Delicate Details: Fingertip Size and the Sex Difference in Tactile Spatial Acuity , 2009, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[17]  Kenneth O. Johnson,et al.  A continuum mechanical model of mechanoreceptive afferent responses to indented spatial patterns. , 2006, Journal of neurophysiology.

[18]  S. Kawamura,et al.  Analysis of stiffness of human fingertip and comparison with artificial fingers , 1999, IEEE SMC'99 Conference Proceedings. 1999 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (Cat. No.99CH37028).

[19]  Kenneth O. Johnson,et al.  Fingertip skin conformance accounts, in part, for differences in tactile spatial acuity in young subjects, but not for the decline in spatial acuity with aging , 2004, Perception & psychophysics.

[20]  A Knüttel,et al.  Thickness of the stratum corneum of the volar fingertips , 2000, Clinical anatomy.

[21]  K L Woodward,et al.  The relationship between skin compliance, age, gender, and tactile discriminative thresholds in humans. , 1993, Somatosensory & motor research.