ArticleScientific reports2026
Shared expectations of soft haptic feedback through imagined high-fives with robots and non-human animals at a science festival.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Imagine a community that does not only exist of humans but also has animals and robots as equal partners. How do we imagine physical interactions with others in such a community will feel? In this paper, we describe an experiment in which 172 participants designed haptic cues related to 13 presented images of a non-human animal or robot. We designed the experiment as an interactive experience at a science festival, where we used soft robotic haptic displays to present haptic cues. The results show that within the presented parameter space, the design choices of the participants were consistent, with clear differences between most of the images. For example, the haptic cue chosen for the elephant was very different from that of the spider. More specifically, we observe that haptic cue frequency and pressure are both correlated with haptic cue area, where larger cue size is associated with lower frequency and higher pressure. Overall, the results of the experiment demonstrate the potential of a large soft robotic haptic display as a versatile interface for human-machine interaction, and of our interactive experiment design as a tool for haptic cue classification by probing shared expectations among human participants.
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.