ArticlePloS one2024
To touch or to be touched? comparing appraisal of vicarious execution and reception of interpersonal touch.
Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Guideline
- Observing positive and negative social touch triggers topographically distinct physical and emotional reactions in the body.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Characteristics of vicarious touch reports in a general population.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Touching Emotions: How Touch Shapes Facial Emotional Processing Among Adolescents and Young Adults.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2025Article
- Rapid visual engagement in neural processing of detailed touch interactions.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- Neurophysiological evidence of motor contribution to vicarious affective touch.Cerebral cortex (New York, N.Y. : 1991) · 2024Article
- The Effects of Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment on Brain Activity: A Scoping Review of MRI and EEG Studies.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unmyelinated C-Tactile (CT) fibres are activated by caress-like touch, eliciting a pleasant feeling that decreases for static and faster stroking. Previous studies documented this effect also for vicarious touch, hypothesising simulation mechanisms driving the perception and appreciation of observed interpersonal touch. Notably, less is known about appreciation of vicarious execution of touch, that is as referred to the one giving gentle touch. To address this issue, 53 healthy participants were asked to view and rate a series of videoclips displaying an individual being touched by another on hairy (i.e., hand dorsum) or glabrous (i.e., palm) skin sites, with touch being delivered at CT-optimal (5 cm/s) or non-CT optimal velocities (0 cm/s or 30 cm/s). Following the observation of each clip, participants were asked to rate self-referred desirability and model-referred pleasantness of vicarious touch for both executer (toucher-referred) and receiver (touchee-referred). Consistent with the CT fibres properties, for both self-referred desirability and model-referred pleasantness judgements of vicarious touch execution and reception, participants provided higher ratings for vicarious touch delivered at CT-optimal than other velocities, and when observed CT-optimal touch was delivered to the hand-dorsum compared to the palm. However, higher ratings were attributed to vicarious reception compared to execution of CT-optimal touch. Notably, individual differences in interoceptive trusting and attitude to interpersonal touch were positively correlated with, respectively, toucher- and touchee-related overall appraisal ratings of touch. These findings suggest that the appreciation of both toucher- and touchee-referred vicarious touch is specifically attuned to CT-optimal touch, even though they might rely on different neurocognitive mechanisms to understand affective information conveyed by interpersonal tactile interactions.
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.