PS1061: Sensation and Perception
Term I, THURSDAY 2-4 pm
(Windsor Auditorium)
Lecture 6: Touch, smell, taste: Basic, but hidden senses
Course co-ordinator: Johannes M. Zanker,
j.zanker@rhul.ac.uk, (Room W
214)
Lecture Topics
- the range and role of somatic (body) senses
- basic physical and biological aspects of tactile processing
- spatial resolution and cortical representation of touch
- basic processing steps and perceptual space of smell (olfaction)
- olfactory localisation and active exploration
- basic mechanisms of taste – primary 'gustatory'
qualities
somatic senses
somatic senses:
sensing the physical state of the body is based on a variety of information:
- proprioception: position
and posture of body and limbs in space
- tactile sensation:
position and structure of objects making contact with body surface
- nociception: sensing
noxious stimuli applied to body – pain
- temperature: sensing
stimuli that are warmer or colder than body surface
significance of the tactile sense
what is the purpose of touch for human behaviour ?
- orientation, object recognition in darkness
- assessing surface properties: haptic exploration
(can be used for reading – Braille)
- social communication: higher ranking may touch lower
ranking individual
 |
the infamous moment when Australian Premier Paul Keating grabbed the
Queen, earning himself the nickname the 'Lizard
of Oz’ 1992
|
signals and sensors
 |
pressure, deformation, strain
needs to be measured
for this, we have a large number of mechanoreceptors
in our skin, muscles, connective tissue
|
different types of mechanoreceptors
respond to different physical conditions
- Merkel receptor – slow (~1 Hz) > pressure (top leyers
of skin)
- Meissner corpuscle – medium fast (~10 Hz) > flutter
- Ruffini cylinder – fast (~ 100 Hz) > stretching
- Pacinian corpuscle – very fast (~400 Hz) > vibration
NOTE: each of these receptors is specific
in their tuning for frequency, they show adaptation effects,
and have receptive fields...
tactile receptive fields
two pressure points are perceived
as separate if they are stimulating
the receptive fields different mechanosensors (adapted from Goldstein 2002)
|
 |
the receptive field size determines spatial
resolution (the number of points that can be detected in a
given skin area)
|
tactile resolution (receptive field size) varies for different
areas of the body surface: finger tips are better than palm
of the hand, etc...
|
space of touch
a psychophysical approach to test the limits
of touch perception
|
how many points can we resolve on the skin ?
A: what is the smallest
distance of two objects touching the skin that can be discriminated?
B: how well can we identify
the location of an object touching the skin relative to others?
|
spatial resolution of touch: down to the range
of millimeters on fingertips & lips, several centimeters
on back (after Sekuler & Blake 2002)
sensitivity limits of touch
what is the precision of identifying / discriminating different surface
textures by touching them ?
pressure amplitudes (depth variations that reflect the texture
of a surface) that only span a range of a few tens of micrometers
can be detected and discriminated by moving the fingertips
across them !!
(after Sekuler & Blake 2002)
note that moving the fingertips across a surface is a typical case
of active explration, which is a common strategy in sensory perception
|

|
cortical representation
tactile information is transmitted from the mechanoreceptors to the
somatosensory
cortex to be further processed (and converted into percepts)
in this region
|
|
| |
in a first step, a somatosensory map is generated
: a topologically ordered representation of the body surface on the
somatosensory cortex surface – this map is called the ‘homunculus’
(after Penfield & Rasmussen
1950)
|
somatosensory representation
how is the local (fingertip, for instance) information represented in the cortex
?
|
the amount of space (cortical volume)
in the cortical map dedicated to a given region of the skin (body surface)
differs widely; the scale of the map depends on the somatosensory
resolution (number of touch points per skin area–
maximum for fingertips and lips)
|
motor representation
similar to the somatosensory representation, and closely linked to
it, there is a motor map in the cortex that represents
and movement patterns and is involved in motor control
(cartoon by Gary Larson)
|
 |
cortical plasticity
after amputation, some patients experience a variety
vivid sensations from the missing limb: phantom
limbs
|
|
 |
V. Ramachandran
(2000) describes a patient who localizes individual fingers of the amputated
hands on particular regions of the face -- this is interpreted as result
of cortical re-organisation of sensory input from the
amputation stump (and is related to the neighbourhood of the cortical
representations of these regions)
|
… active exploration …
 |
for touch perception the active movement of the ‘sensory
organ’ (skin surface, fingers, hands: haptic
exploration) is crucial
it is a strategy that is continuously applied in various ways: we talk
about ‘handling’ objects
(adapted from Sekuler & Blake 2002)
(NOTE: this is similar to eye, head, body movements in vision)
|
… and in this domain, it is possible to generate a 'haptic' Muller-Lyer
illusion
(see Heller et al.
2002)
reading by touch - Braille
Braille letters are specifically
designed symbols for stimulating the fingertips, which allows blind people to
read...

what is so special about Braille letters, why not just using embossed Roman
characters ?
 |
Braille is adapted to low resolution of touch:
- if Roman letters
(e) are blurred (f), they can no longer be discriminated
- if Braille characters
(b) are blurred (c), they still have very characteristic (discriminable)
shapes !
|
so why not just using larger Roman characters ?
this is not favourable because of the restricted scope of fingertips: only few
characters can be touched at the same time ...
‘olfactory’ perception – smell
what is the significance of smell
for everyday behaviour ?
- general alarm system (e.g. fire, smokers)
- component of flavour (testing food)
- part of communication (pheromones)
- discrimination in social context (family, gender, attractiveness…
)
how can we classify odours ?
- there is no simple physical dimensions like in vision (brightness,
colour) or hearing (loudness, pitch)
- we tend to use descriptions by examples (e.g. 'this soap smells like
Lavender')
experimental issues:
what are the lower limits of detecting odours, can we measure
the intensity of smells, can we localise them ?
- even less simple answers (difficult to control concentration of airbourne
molecules)
- in consequence, smell is a sense full of mystery !
smell : the sensory system
the sensory
organ for smell has a very intricate physical and biochemical design
 |
the air flows through nose & mouth
it passes the olfactory epithelium in nasal cavity: full of chemosensors
sensory neurones carry information to glomeruli in
olfactory bulb and from there to sensory cortex
|
NOTE: olfactory receptors have very narrow sensory tuning, because they are
binding very specifically to chemicals !! (only a very small group of molecules
would bind to a given receptor); there are about 1000 different types of receptors
(Nobel Prize 2004 was awarded to Richard Axel & Linda Buck, working on these
recpetors)
recognition of odours
smell: how many different
odours can we identify or discriminate?
- quite a few … (but not millions) <<test your sense of
smell in when you visit the Body Shop next time>>
| recognition performce
for a wide range of odours
(female better than male participants: white bars; male better than female
participants: black bars)
|
|
how reliable is odour
discrimination ?
- pretty bad ! (performance 20-80% correct identification)
classification: smell space
can we identify a small basis set of fundamental
odours? (simple sensory space, like brightness, primary colours,
pitch)
6 primary (independent) odour qualities:
fragrant, etheral, resinous, spicey, burned, putrid
they form a basis to describe any smell sensation as combination
of these 6 components
(similar to trichromatic colour vision)
this corresponds to 6 types of receptors, is reflected
by specific anosmias ('smell blindness')
|

|
- however, this view is not generally accepted !
- Amoore (1964) suggested 7 primary odour qualities
- the debate is still open and keeps going (slowly)...
- we now know that there are much more receptor types!
an olfactory code ?
encoding these complex smell sensations in neural activity (reflecting perceptual
classification of odours !!) is not straight-forward >>> there is a
combinatorial olfactory code
(after Goldstein 2002)
little is known in humans, but population
code (a specific pattern of activity that is distributed
across a group of neurones reflects a given odour) is used in a wide
range of biological systems …
|
further up in the senory processing stream, we find neuronal activity
pattrens that suggest the existence of an olfactory
map ...
|
|
|
odour localisation, sniffing
how well can we localise the source of an odour
?
(compare this to other sensory qualities, like vision, hearing, touch, ... )
 |
experimentally, this problem is less easy to approach than in vision
or hearing!
some researchers invented some ingenious sniffo-meters…
(this looks like real fun!)
NOTE: other animals seem to perform much better (think of HMC's
sniffer dogs...)
(after Sekuler & Blake, 2002)
|
- again, performance is rather poor
(in humans) !!!
- behavioural strategies can help to solve the localisation problem
at a larger spatial scale (‘olfactomotor activity’ = sniffing)
- scanning movements are common in various animal systems, e.g. insects
use odour sources for orientation
- scent tracking - humans as sniffre dogs - have a look at humans
on the chocolate trail ...
‘gustatory’ perception: taste
taste
– another type of chemical sense (for chemicals in solution) …
why is it important to have
a sense of taste ?
- security system (poisonous food tastes different)
- homeosthasis: balance of nutrients can be guaranteed by selective
eating
- pleasure (‘good taste’) .........
why is it an interesting scientific topic
?
- so far rather mysterious (absence of simple theoretical framework,
similar to smell)
- less extensively investigated than visual or auditory system …(no
simple experimental techniques)
- high economic relevance ! (you can learn how to sell lots of junk
food to happy customers)
taste: the sensory system
microscopic image of the surface of the tongue
:
large papillae carry a huge number of chemoreceptors
(taste
buds)
|
|
|
chemosensors transmit information through gustatory neurones
to the frontal cortex for further processing (including
some interaction with olfactory information)
distributed coding in neurone population !!
|
NOTE: these sensors are exposed to many inadequate stimuli, like heat or aggressive
chemicals, leading to massive cell death and continuous regeneration
<< think about the consequences for neuronal connectivity and sensory
information processing! >>
fundamental taste space ?
can we identify basic taste qualities ?
4 different types of chemoreceptors (in the taste
buds) sense chemical signals from bitter, sweet, sour and salty substances
traditionally they are regarded as physiological basis of 4
perceptual categories (new evidence suggests existence of a
fifth taste category: ‘umami’ or 'savoury')
(after Goldstein 2002)
|
 |
- but: ‘savoury’ discussed as fifth …
- experimental
evidence (similar to colour vision)
- mixtures of categories cannot be perceived
- no cross-adaptation
- aftereffects – water tastes sweet after bitter/sour
adaptation
|
in everyday life, we tend to use qualitative descriptions and refer to objects
when describing tastes <<think of the flavour of lollies…>>
perceiving taste quality
there is little psychophysical knowledge
there is no direct spatial representation, because taste stimuli are carried
by the fluid medium passing the tounge...
one example of classical knowledge about encoding of gustatory information
(after Hänig
1901), see here

the relative thresholds for detecting sweet - bitter - salty - sour vary
considerably for different regions of the tongue
crosstalk between senses
in general, there are very close (and often learned: Rolls et al 1996) smell-taste
associations, for instance in the flavour of food !
the nature of enjoying food is relying on a combination of senses: smell - taste
– texture - looks (which sensory systems are involved ? )
flavour is a complex perceptual phenomenon …
other interactions of chemical senses, like direct sensory crosstalk (in-adequate
stimulatiuon on receptor level), are quite common
one example for a well
investigated taste problem is hot food, crossing sensory boundaries at a
low processing level
hot chili contain
a chemical called ' capsaicin‘
- they activate nociceptive C fibres (pain receptors), which are also
activated by heat ! (Caterina, MJ et al. 1997)
|
|
|
|
NOTE: one chemical activates two sensory systems!
in reversal, capsaicin can elevate pain thresholds by
adaptation of pain receptors …
|
summary: touch, smell, taste
- somatic senses: body posture and body surface are
perceived along a set of different dimensions (pain, temperature, pressure…)
- touch is a spatial sense with a range of biological
functions
- tactile perception : receptive field organisation
and cortical representation
- active exploration is crucial for low-resolution
touch perception
- chemical senses (smell and taste) have similar
properties and interact
- olfactory perception: the complex dimensionality
of this sense requires population coding
- gustatory perception (taste): generally believed
to have 4 (or 5) basic qualities, little detailed knowledge
Reading:
- Goldstein, EB (2007) Sensation
and Perception (7th ed.), Wadsworth (152.1 GOL), chapters 11 - 13 for
cutaneous and chemical senses
- Sekuler, R & Blake, R (2002) Perception. (4th ed.) New
York: McGraw-Hill (153.7 SEK), chapters 12 & 13 for touch and smell &
taste
a textbook reflecting the course contents will be
published in March 2010:
Zanker (2010) Sensation, Perception, Action - an evolutionary perspective. Palgrave
(chapters 9 and 10)
Specific References:
- Amoore JE (1964) “Current status of the steric theory
of odor” Ann. N.Y Acad. Sci. 116, 457-476
- Caterina, MJ et al. (1997) ‘The capsaicin receptor:
a heat-activated ion channel in the pain pathway.’ Nature 389, 816 -
824, click here
(download from Journal)
- Hänig DP (1901) “Zur Psychophysik des Geschmackssinnes”
Philosophische Studien 17: 576-623
- Heller MA et al. (2002) “The haptic Muller-Lyer
illusion in sighted and blind people.” Perception 31, 1263-1274, click
here
(download from Journal)
- Penfield W, Rasmussen T (1950) The Cerebral Cortex of Man. A Clinical
Study of Localization of Function. New York, The Macmillan Comp.
- Ramachandran VS (2000) “Phantom Limbs and Neural Plasticity”
Archives of Neurology 57, 317-320, click here
(download from Journal)
- Rolls ET, Critchley HD, Treves A. (1996) “Representation
of olfactory information in the primate orbitofrontal cortex” Journal
of Neurophysiology 75, 1982-1996
- von Henning H (1916) Der Geruch. Leipzig: Barth
to download pdf-file of e-handout click here
to download pdf-file of the draft textbook chapter 10 (somatic senses) click
here, and chapter 9 (smell & taste)
click here (feedback very welcome!)
back to course
outline
last update
19-11-2009
Johannes
M. Zanker