Perceptual timing precision with vibrotactile, auditory, and multisensory stimuli
It is important to understand the perceptual limits on vibrotactile information-processing because of the increasing use of vibrotactile signals in common technologies like cell phones. To advance such an understanding, we examined vibrotactile temporal acuity and compared it to auditory and bimodal (synchronous vibrotactile and auditory) temporal acuity. In a pair of experiments, subjects experienced a series of empty intervals, demarcated by stimulus pulses from one of the three modalities. One trial contained up to 5 intervals, where the first intervals were isochronous at 400 ms, and the last interval varied from 400 by ±1-80 ms. If the final interval was < 400 ms, the last pulse seemed “early”, and if the final interval was > 400 ms, the last pulse seemed “late”. In Experiment One, each trial contained four intervals, where the first three were isochronous. Subjects judged the timing of the last interval by describing the final pulse as either “early” or “late”. In Experiment Two, the number of isochronous intervals in a trial varied from one to four. Psychometric modeling revealed that vibrotactile temporal processing was less acute than auditory or bimodal temporal processing, and that auditory inputs dominated bimodal perception. Additionally, varying the number of isochronous intervals did not affect temporal sensitivity in either modality, suggesting the formation of memory traces. Overall, these results suggest that vibrotactile temporal processing is worse than auditory or bimodal temporal processing, which are similar. Also, subjects need no more than one isochronous reminder per trial for optimal performance.