ArticleScientific reports2024
Trypophobia, skin disease, and the visual discomfort of natural textures.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- A Cerebral Basis for Visual Discomfort and Visual Stress.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Emotional and visual responses to trypophobic images with object, animal, or human body backgrounds: an eye-tracking study.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the last decade, the behavioral sciences have described the phenomenon of trypophobia, which is the discomfort felt by some individuals when viewing images containing clusters of bumps or holes. One evolutionary hypothesis for this phenomenon is that this visual discomfort represents an adaptation which helps organisms avoid skin disease and/or ectoparasites. Even though trypophobic imagery and disease imagery are both examples of visual textures, to date there has been no comparison of the visual discomfort elicited by these two specific kinds of textures within the larger context of the visual comfort elicited by natural texture imagery more generally. In the present study, we administered the Trypophobia Questionnaire (TQ) and recorded the visual comfort ratings elicited by a large set of standard natural texture images, including several trypophobic and skin disease images. In two independent samples, we found that while all observers find skin diseases uncomfortable to view, only those scoring high on the TQ rated trypophobic imagery equally uncomfortable. Comparable effects were observed using both standard ANOVA procedures as well as linear mixed effects modeling. Comparing the ratings of both high-TQ and low-TQ participants to the standard textures, we find remarkably consistent rank-order preferences, with the most unpleasant textures (as rated by both groups) exhibiting qualitative similarities to trypophobic imagery. However, we also find that low-level image statistics which have been previously shown to affect visual comfort are poor predictors of the visual comfort elicited by natural textures, including trypophobic and disease imagery. Our results suggest that a full understanding of the visual comfort elicited by natural textures, including those arising from skin disease, will ultimately depend upon a better understanding of cortical areas specialized for the perception of surface and material properties, and how these visual regions interact with emotional brain areas to evoke appropriate behavioral responses, like disgust.
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.