Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Aug 16.
Published in final edited form as: IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng. 2017 Jan 17;15(1):290–306. doi: 10.1109/TASE.2016.2635106

TABLE II.

Summary of Experiment #1

Subjects 16 (14 males, 2 females)

Task moving a soft gripper along a predetermined trajectory, being as fast and precise as possible

Conditions Visual feedback (Vs)
Visual + Vibrotactile feedback (Vs + Vb)
Visual + Frictional feedback (Vs + Pc)
Kinesthetic feedback (K)
Visual + Position-error feedback (Vs + Pe)
Visual + Vibrotactile + Position-error feedback (Vs+Vb+Pe)
Visual + Frictional + Position-error feedback (Vs + Pc + Pe)
Kinesthetic + Position-error feedback (K + Pe)

Video available as supplemental material

Best conditions (average)
Completion time K (42.38 s)
Error in following trajectory K + Pe (0.53 mm)
Distance between reference and gripper K + Pe (0.97 mm)
Perceived effectiveness K (8.26)

Statistical analysis (two-way repeated measures ANOVA)
  Completion time (significant p values only)
Factor 1: presence of Pe feedback (p = 0.001)
Factor 2: feedback type (p < 0.001)
Vs + Vb vs. Vs p = 0.013
Vs + Vb vs. Vs + Pc p = 0.003
Vs + Vb vs. K p = 0.002
  Error in following trajectory (significant p values only)
Factor 1: presence of Pe feedback (p < 0.001)
Factor 2: feedback type (p < 0.001)
Vs vs. Vs + Vb p < 0.001
Vs vs. Vs + Pc p < 0.001
Vs vs. K p < 0.001
Vs + Vb vs. Vs + Pc p < 0.001
Vs + Vb vs. K p < 0.001
Vs + Pc vs. K p < 0.001
  Distance between reference and gripper (significant p values only)
Factor 1: presence of Pe feedback (p < 0.001)
  Perceived effectiveness
Factor 1: presence of Pe feedback (p = 0.002)
Factor 2: feedback type (p < 0.001)
Vs vs. Vs + Vb p < 0.001
Vs vs. K p < 0.001
Vs + Vb vs. Vs + Pc p < 0.001
Vs + Vb vs. K p < 0.001
Vs + Pc vs. K p < 0.001