4.2 Article

Tactile perceptual learning: learning curves and transfer to the contralateral finger

Journal

EXPERIMENTAL BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 224, Issue 3, Pages 477-488

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00221-012-3329-8

Keywords

Human; Perceptual learning; Somatosensory; Vernier

Categories

Funding

  1. BrainGain Smart Mix Programme of the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs
  2. Netherlands Ministry of Education, Culture and Science

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Tactile perceptual learning has been shown to improve performance on tactile tasks, but there is no agreement about the extent of transfer to untrained skin locations. The lack of such transfer is often seen as a behavioral index of the contribution of early somatosensory brain regions. Moreover, the time course of improvements has never been described explicitly. Sixteen subjects were trained on the Ludvigh task (a tactile vernier task) on four subsequent days. On the fifth day, transfer of learning to the non-trained contralateral hand was tested. In five subjects, we explored to what extent training effects were retained approximately 1.5 years after the final training session, expecting to find long-term retention of learning effects after training. Results showed that tactile perceptual learning mainly occurred offline, between sessions. Training effects did not transfer initially, but became fully available to the untrained contralateral hand after a few additional training runs. After 1.5 years, training effects were not fully washed out and could be recuperated within a single training session. Interpreted in the light of theories of visual perceptual learning, these results suggest that tactile perceptual learning is not fundamentally different from visual perceptual learning, but might proceed at a slower pace due to procedural and task differences, thus explaining the apparent divergence in the amount of transfer and long-term retention.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available