ArticleScientific reports2022
Visual estimation of the force applied by another person.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As observers, we believe that we can visually estimate the force that another person is applying to a material. However, it is unclear what kind of cues we use to do this. We focused on two types of visual change that occur when actors push an elastic material from above with their fingers: visual shaking and visual indentation depth. The first one relates to a finger/hand shaking, known as an "induced tremor", and the second one relates to material deformation due to the application of force. We found that human observers mainly used visual shaking to estimate the force being applied by another person in a video clip. Overall, the apparent applied force was perceived to be stronger when the level of visual shaking was greater. We also found that observers mainly used visual indentation depth and visual shaking to estimate the softness rating of materials. Overall, the apparent softness was perceived to be greater when the visual indentation depth was larger and the level of visual shaking was lower, which indicates that observers use visual shaking to estimate the force being applied, and that estimated force is then used for an estimation of softness.
Indexed as
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.