Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Continuous Hand-Arm Vibrations Do Not Interfere with Cognitive Processing Cover

Continuous Hand-Arm Vibrations Do Not Interfere with Cognitive Processing

Open Access
|Feb 2026

Figures & Tables

joc-9-1-490-g1.png
Figure 1

Trial sequence (a) and response keys and vibration platform (b) for Experiment 1.

joc-9-1-490-g2.png
Figure 2

Experiment 1: Boxplot of mean response times (RT; upper panel) and proportion correct (lower panel) separately per vibration condition and congruency.

Note. Dashed lines represent differences of individuals within one vibration condition.

joc-9-1-490-g3.png
Figure 3

Experiment 2: Boxplot of mean response times (RT; upper panel) and proportion correct (lower panel) separately per vibration condition and congruency.

Note. Dashed lines represent differences of individuals within one vibration condition.

joc-9-1-490-g4.png
Figure 4

Correlation of introspective concentration, speed, accuracy, comfort, and discomfort.

Note. Panel (a) depicts the correlation of introspective concentration, speed, and accuracy across all vibration conditions. Panel (b) considers the correlations only based on the data of the conditions with constant and random vibration. The numbers represent the correlation coefficients, blue indicate positive correlations, red negative correlations, and blank cells depict non-significant correlations.

Table 1

Test results from ANOVAs with the within-subject factors vibration condition and sub-block and introspective concentration, introspective speed, introspective accuracy, vibration comfort, and vibration discomfort as dependent variables.

INTROSPECTIVE CONCENTRATION
vibration conditionF(2, 57.7) = 0.43p = .654, ηp2 = .014
sub-blockF(2.3, 66.3) = 10.1p < .001, ηp2 = .258
vibration condition × sub-blockF(6.1, 177.5) = 1.16p = .332, ηp2 = .038
INTROSPECTIVE SPEEDINTROSPECTIVE ACCURACY
vibration conditionF(1.8, 51.3) = 2.17p = .130, ηp2 = .070F(1.9, 55.1) = 1.16p = .320, ηp2 = .038
sub-blockF(3.3, 95.8) = 1.35p = .262, ηp2 = .044F(4.1, 120.2) = 3.55p = .008, ηp2 = .109
vibration condition × sub-blockF(6.3, 182.4) = 0.73p = .633, ηp2 = .025F(6.9, 200.7) = 0.80p = .584, ηp2 = .027
VIBRATION COMFORTVIBRATION DISCOMFORT
vibration conditionF(1, 29) = 3.13p = .087, ηp2 = .097F(1, 29) = 6.99p = .013, ηp2 = .194
sub-blockF(3.1, 90.3) = 4.58p = .004, ηp2 = .136F(3.3, 96.9) = 3.02p = .029, ηp2 = .094
vibration condition × sub-blockF(3.1, 88.7) = 0.98p = .405, ηp2 = .033F(3.9, 113.2) = 1.45p = .224, ηp2 = .048

[i] Note. The factor vibration condition includes no-vibration, constant vibration, and random vibration in the ANOVA for introspective concentration, speed, and accuracy. For vibration comfort and discomfort it includes only constant vibration and random vibration.

joc-9-1-490-g5.png
Figure 5

Mean introspective concentration, speed, accuracy, comfort, and discomfort separately for each block of 50 trials (sub-block) and vibration condition.

joc-9-1-490-g6.png
Figure 6

Mean speed and accuracy separately for each block of 50 trials (sub-block) and per vibration condition.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/joc.490 | Journal eISSN: 2514-4820
Language: English
Submitted on: Oct 23, 2025
|
Accepted on: Feb 4, 2026
|
Published on: Feb 17, 2026
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2026 Anne Voormann, Andreas Lindenmann, Jan Heinrich Robens, Sven Matthiesen, Andrea Kiesel, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.