ArticlePloS one2025
Modulation of the post-auricular reflex in response to social and CT-optimal touch.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The pleasantness perception of CT-optimal touch is usually assessed with subjective and explicit measures. As these can be prone to biases, it is important to develop implicit measures as well. The vestigial post-auricular muscle reflex (PAR) might be a good candidate, given its sensitivity to pleasant visual and auditory stimuli. As such, we investigated if the PAR can also be modulated by CT-optimal touch. We additionally compared how the PAR responds to social and robotic touch and conducted control experiments to replicate the reflex's specific sensitivity to primary rewards. The sample consisted of 43 non-clinical participants. PAR responses were recorded while participants were touched by an experimenter and a robot, with a velocity of 3 cm/s (CT-optimal touch) and 18 cm/s (CT non-optimal touch). After each trial, participants also subjectively rated the pleasantness of the touch. Although the results revealed that CT-optimal touch was subjectively perceived to be more pleasant than CT non-optimal touch, it did not result in a potentiation of the PAR. Interestingly, social touch was subjectively perceived to be more pleasant than robotic touch and potentiated the PAR. The control experiments confirmed that the PAR is particularly modulated by primary (food, erotica), and not secondary (adventure, cuteness, monetary) rewards. While additional research is needed to further investigate the relation between the PAR and CT-optimal touch, the current results do already suggest that this reflex responds to the primary reward value of social touch.
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.