ArticleScientific reports2024
How material sensory properties and individual differences influence the haptic aesthetic appeal of visually presented stimuli.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Touch plays a crucial role for humans. Despite its centrality in sensory experiences, the field of haptic aesthetics is underexplored. So far, existing research has revealed that preferences in the haptic domain are related to stimulus properties and the Gestalt laws of grouping. Additionally, haptic aesthetics is influenced by top-down processes, e.g., stimulus familiarity, and is likely to be modulated by personality and expertise. To further our understanding of these influences on haptic aesthetic appraisal, the current study investigated the imagined haptic aesthetic appeal of visually presented material surfaces, considering the role of haptic expertise, Need for touch, personality traits. The results revealed a positive influence of familiarity, simplicity, smoothness, warmth, lightness, dryness, slipperiness and a negative influence of complexity on individuals' aesthetic responses. While the study failed to support the predicted influence of Need for touch and haptic expertise on aesthetic responses, results did reveal an influence of openness to experience, conscientiousness and neuroticism. Despite the limitations related to the indirect stimuli presentation (vision only), the findings contribute to the relatively unexplored role of bottom-up and top-down features in haptic aesthetics that might be incorporated into the design of consumers' products to better meet their preferences.
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.