Cited by 99Tactile and Sensory InteractionsHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyUsability and User Interface Design

A meta-analysis of vibrotactile and visual information displays for improving task performance

Prewett, M. S., Elliott, L. R., Walvoord, A. G., Coovert, M. D.·2012·IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews)

Abstract

Many studies have investigated the effect of vibrotactile cues on task performance, but a wide range of cue and task types have made findings difficult to interpret without a quantitative synthesis. This report addresses that need by reviewing the effectiveness of vibrotactile cues in a meta-analysis of 45 studies. When added to a baseline task or to existing visual cues, vibrotactile cues enhanced task performance. When vibrotactile cues replaced visual cues; however, some effects were attenuated and others moderated by cue information complexity. To summarize such moderating effects, vibrotactile alerts are an effective replacement for visual alerts, but vibrotactile direction cues are not effective when replacing visual direction cues. This meta-analysis of vibrotactile applications underscores the benefits of vibrotactile and multimodal displays, highlights conditions in which vibrotactile cues are particularly effective, and identifies areas in need of further investigation.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tsmcc.2010.2103057

Cites

77 of 77 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Using a vibrotactile cue as an alert or message is more effective than using a visual cue when the primary task is visual.

    “Prewett et al. (2012) demonstrated that using a vibrotactile cue (which is obviously non-visual) as an alert or message is more effective than using a visual cue when the primary task is visual.”
  • Previous studies using simple vibration motors to implement vibrotactile cues have a limitation that only directional or spatial cue information may be provided.

    “previous studies utilizing simple vibration motors to implement vibrotactile cues have a clear limitation in that only directional or spatial cue information may be provided (Prewett et al., 2012).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 78 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Prewett, M. S., Elliott, L. R., Walvoord, A. G., & Coovert, M. D.
Affiliations
  • Central Michigan University (US)
  • United States Army (US)
  • University of South Florida (US)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews)
Published
2012-01
Volume
42
Issue
1
Pages
123-132
ISSN
  • 1094-6977 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-2442
OpenAlex
W2008905788
Cited by
99
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 1
FWCI
0.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part C (Applications and Reviews) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
Keywords
vibrotactile cues, visual alerts, task performance, multimodal displays, human-computer interaction, haptic feedback

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review