CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 231Tactile and Sensory InteractionsMotor Control and AdaptationVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Diminutive Digits Discern Delicate Details: Fingertip Size and the Sex Difference in Tactile Spatial Acuity

Open access
Peters, Ryan M., Hackeman, Erik, Goldreich, Daniel·2009·The Journal of Neuroscience
DOI 10.1523/jneurosci.3684-09.2009PMC PMC3849661
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We have observed that passive tactile spatial acuity, the ability to resolve the spatial structure of surfaces pressed upon the skin, differs subtly but consistently between the sexes, with women able to perceive finer surface detail than men. Eschewing complex central explanations, we hypothesized that this sex difference in somatosensory perception might result from simple physical differences between the fingers of women and men. To investigate, we tested 50 women and 50 men on a tactile grating orientation task and measured the surface area of the participants' index fingertips. In subsets of participants, we additionally measured finger skin compliance and optically imaged the fingerprint microstructure to count sweat pores. We show here that tactile perception improves with decreasing finger size, and that this correlation fully explains the better perception of women, who on average have smaller fingers than men. Indeed, when sex and finger size are both considered in statistical analyses, only finger size predicts tactile acuity. Thus, a man and a woman with fingers of equal size will, on average, enjoy equal tactile acuity. We further show that sweat pores, and presumably the Merkel receptors beneath them, are packed more densely in smaller fingers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1523/jneurosci.3684-09.2009

Cites

46 of 46 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?

  • Spatial acuity is largely driven by SAI afferents, which possess the smallest receptive fields and therefore the highest spatial resolution.

    “Previous work suggests that spatial acuity is largely driven by SAI afferents (Peters et al. 2009), which possess the smallest receptive fields and, therefore, the highest spatial resolution.”

    From Tactile innervation densities across the whole body (2020) · cites this paper as Peters et al. 2009

  • Tactile acuity is not fixed but improves with training.

    “As prior research has shown, tactile acuity is not fixed but improves with training; while the eventual plateau performance is likely determined by innervation density, typical performance might not (Peters et al. 2009).”

    From Tactile innervation densities across the whole body (2020) · cites this paper as Peters et al. 2009

  • Eventual plateau performance in tactile acuity is likely determined by innervation density, while typical performance might not be.

    “As prior research has shown, tactile acuity is not fixed but improves with training; while the eventual plateau performance is likely determined by innervation density, typical performance might not (Peters et al. 2009).”

    From Tactile innervation densities across the whole body (2020) · cites this paper as Peters et al. 2009

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Peters, R. M., Hackeman, E., & Goldreich, D.
Affiliations
  • McMaster University (CA)
  • Duquesne University (US)
ORCID
Venue
The Journal of Neuroscience
Publisher
Society for Neuroscience
Published
2009-12-16
Volume
29
Issue
50
Pages
15756-15761
ISSN
  • 0270-6474 (ISSN-L)
  • 1529-2401
DOI
10.1523/jneurosci.3684-09.2009
PMC
PMC3849661
OpenAlex
W2081914368
Cited by
231
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 15 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 10
FWCI
4.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Journal of Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Eye Institute
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
tactile spatial acuity, sex differences, somatosensory perception, sweat pores
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Female, Fingers, Humans, Male, Sensory Thresholds, Sex Characteristics, Space Perception, Touch, Merkel Cells, Touch Perception, Young Adult

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