ArticleScientific reports2021
Effect of 2.5D haptic feedback on virtual object perception via a stylus.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Perceptual space and adjective rating of 2.5D tactile patterns.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Recent Progress of Tactile and Force Sensors for Human-Machine Interaction.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As touch screen technologies advanced, a digital stylus has become one of the essential accessories for a smart device. However, most of the digital styluses so far provide limited tactile feedback to a user. Therefore we focused on the limitation and noted the potential that a digital stylus may offer the sensation of realistic interaction with virtual environments on a touch screen using a 2.5D haptic system. Thus, we developed a haptic stylus with SMA (Shape Memory Alloy) and a 2.5D haptic rendering algorithm to provide lateral skin-stretch feedback to mimic the interaction force between fingertip and a stylus probing over a bumpy surface. We conducted two psychophysical experiments to evaluate the effect of 2.5D haptic feedback on the perception of virtual object geometry. Experiment 1 investigated the human perception of virtual bump size felt via the proposed lateral skin-stretch stylus and a vibrotactile stylus as reference. Experiment 2 tested the participants' ability to count the number of virtual bumps rendered via the two types of haptic styluses. The results of Experiment 1 indicate that the participants felt the size of virtual bumps rendered with lateral skin-stretch stylus significantly sensitively than the vibrotactile stylus. Similarly, the participants counted the number of virtual bumps rendered with the lateral skin-stretch stylus significantly better than with the vibrotactile stylus. A common result of the two experiments is a significantly longer mean trial time for the skin-stretch stylus than the vibrotactile stylus.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.