ArticleScientific reports2025
Partner-sourced haptic feedback rather than environmental inputs drives coordination improvement in human dyadic collaboration.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Haptic communication is a critical communication channel in physical collaboration. However, most studies focus on simplistic tasks with predetermined solutions, restricting the exploration of collaborative behaviors. In this study, we designed a complex task derived from the classic ball-beam control problem, requiring pairs of participants to collaboratively control an unstable object with internal degrees of freedom. The task's redundant nature allowed diverse strategies and collaboration patterns to emerge. We systematically examined the impact of different sources of haptic feedback, distinguishing between forces arising from the collaborator's actions and forces arising from the task dynamics. Participants collaborated across five haptic feedback conditions: full haptics, partner only, environment only, no haptics, or unrelated haptics. Haptic feedback significantly enhanced interpersonal coordination, primarily via partner-sourced rather than environment-sourced haptic feedback. Despite equal access to information and mechanical leverage, participants naturally assumed leader-follower roles, which were robustly quantified across multiple metrics. We showed how leadership dynamics evolved throughout the experiment and varied across different haptic conditions. This study advances the understanding of haptic communication, highlighting the value of partner haptics in developing more effective and adaptive strategies for both human-human and human-robot collaboration.
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.