Vibrotactile stimulation on the upper back requires stronger vibration during goal-directed reaching but does not impede reaching performance
- 1York University
Abstract
Vibrotactile stimulation is a promising method of biofeedback, with potential applications for ergonomic posture and balance, rehabilitation, and motor learning. These applications require balancing tactile perception with motor performance and cognitive workload. In this study, participants performed a detection task, a reaching task, and a concurrent reach-and-detect task, with vibrotactile signals delivered on the hand or upper back. Sensitivity to stimuli, motor performance, and cognitive workload were compared for each task. Sensitivity was suppressed during movement, but this suppression was greater on hand compared to the upper back. Movement time was slowed by vibration on the hand but not the upper back. Mental workload and task complexity increased for the reach-and-detect task compared to the individual tasks. We conclude that vibrotactile feedback devices worn on the upper back do not impede motor performance, with only minor tactile suppression. This could be overcome by presenting highly salient or personalized feedback.
Related
- Phase-locked dual-band vibration bursts strengthen anti-kindling by vibrotactile coordinated reset stimulation in a spiking network model
- Spatio-temporal control of vibrotactile stimulation on OLED displays with inverse filtering
- Vibrotactile transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) during working memory: convergent electrophysiological evidence for cortical efficiency
- Evaluating vibroacoustic sensor performance and vibration attenuation: implications for soil biodiversity sampling
- Remembering touch: Somatosensory cortex supports long-term memory for dynamic vibrotactile patterns.
BibTeX
@misc{atkin2026vibrotactile,
title = {{Vibrotactile stimulation on the upper back requires stronger vibration during goal-directed reaching but does not impede reaching performance}},
author = {A. E. Atkin and B. M. 't Hart and C. M. Whyne and S. Tomescu and B. H. Strauss and Q. Li and D. Y. P. Henriques},
howpublished = {bioRxiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.64898/2026.10.13.755060},
url = {https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.13.755060v1},
note = {CC BY-NC},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Vibrotactile stimulation on the upper back requires stronger vibration during goal-directed reaching but does not impede reaching performance
AU - A. E. Atkin
AU - B. M. 't Hart
AU - C. M. Whyne
AU - S. Tomescu
AU - B. H. Strauss
AU - Q. Li
AU - D. Y. P. Henriques
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/13
PB - bioRxiv
DO - 10.64898/2026.10.13.755060
UR - https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.64898/2026.10.13.755060v1
AB - Vibrotactile stimulation is a promising method of biofeedback, with potential applications for ergonomic posture and balance, rehabilitation, and motor learning. These applications require balancing tactile perception with motor performance and cognitive workload. In this study, participants performed a detection task, a reaching task, and a concurrent reach-and-detect task, with vibrotactile signals delivered on the hand or upper back. Sensitivity to stimuli, motor performance, and cognitive workload were compared for each task. Sensitivity was suppressed during movement, but this suppression was greater on hand compared to the upper back. Movement time was slowed by vibration on the hand but not the upper back. Mental workload and task complexity increased for the reach-and-detect task compared to the individual tasks. We conclude that vibrotactile feedback devices worn on the upper back do not impede motor performance, with only minor tactile suppression. This could be overcome by presenting highly salient or personalized feedback.
ER -