ReviewAttention, perception & psychophysics2022
Roughness perception: A multisensory/crossmodal perspective.
Review in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 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
30 citing papers in PubMed.
- Expressing emotions through music.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2026Review
- Musical expectations modulate declarative memory formation.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Embodied Responses to Harmony and (Poly)Rhythm: An Integrated Ratio-Based Perception-Action Framework.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Review
- The vertical symphony: how pitch perception shapes spatial and affective mapping across different countries.Cognitive processing · 2026Article
- Consonance Shapes the Multisensory and Emotional Mappings of Musical Intervals Across English- and Mandarin-Speakers.Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2026Article
- Modeling human social vision with cinematic stimuli: An integrative approach.Journal of vision · 2026Article
- Generative adversarial networks enable biomimetic topology fusion with balanced mechanical performance and aesthetic quality.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Auditory-conceptual associations in Peter and the Wolf and Carnival of the Animals: Evidence from 6- to 9-year-old children.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2026Article
- Associating (dis)consonance of harmonic intervals with emotional valences: exploring the visual representation of music through crossmodal associations.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Predicting human tactile smoothness/roughness perception from multidimensional mechanical properties of synthetic fibers using machine learning.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Acoustic estimation of voice roughness.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Tactile and interpersonal sound symbolic associations in patients with multiple somatic symptoms.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Rough is salient: a conserved vocal niche to hijack the brain's salience system.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2025Review
- The role of skin hydration, skin deformability, and age in tactile friction and perception of materials.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Augmenting art crossmodally: possibilities and pitfalls.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Review
- Crossmodal correspondences between visual and speech angularity and tactile jaggedness of response key.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Probing the link between vision and language in material perception using psychophysics and unsupervised learning.PLoS computational biology · 2024Article
- What, if anything, can be considered an amodal sensory dimension?Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Review
- Probing the Link Between Vision and Language in Material Perception Using Psychophysics and Unsupervised Learning.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024Article
- Sensory translation between audition and vision.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Roughness is a perceptual attribute typically associated with certain stimuli that are presented in one of the spatial senses. In auditory research, the term is typically used to describe the harsh effects that are induced by particular sound qualities (i.e., dissonance) and human/animal vocalizations (e.g., screams, distress cries). In the tactile domain, roughness is a crucial factor determining the perceptual features of a surface. The same feature can also be ascertained visually, by means of the extraction of pattern features that determine the haptic quality of surfaces, such as grain size and density. By contrast, the term roughness has rarely been applied to the description of those stimuli perceived via the chemical senses. In this review, we take a critical look at the putative meaning(s) of the term roughness, when used in both unisensory and multisensory contexts, in an attempt to answer two key questions: (1) Is the use of the term 'roughness' the same in each modality when considered individually? and (2) Do crossmodal correspondences involving roughness match distinct perceptual features or (at least on certain occasions) do they merely pick-up on an amodal property? We start by examining the use of the term in the auditory domain. Next, we summarize the ways in which the term roughness has been used in the literature on tactile and visual perception, and in the domain of olfaction and gustation. Then, we move on to the crossmodal context, reviewing the literature on the perception of roughness in the audiovisual, audiotactile, and auditory-gustatory/olfactory domains. Finally, we highlight some limitations of the reviewed literature and we outline a number of key directions for future empirical research in roughness perception.
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.