Articlei-Perception
Assessing the role(s) of human touch in immersive entertainment.
Article in i-Perception. 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
Physical touch plays an important role in various forms of immersive entertainment, influencing emotional engagement, presence, and narrative immersion. In this narrative historical review, we explore the significance of direct interpersonal (social) touch in entertainment contexts. This includes theme parks, immersive theater, participatory performance art, and digitally mediated touch (e.g., haptic feedback in virtual reality [VR], gaming, and film). By analyzing examples such as Disneyland character interactions, Sleep No More, and audience participation in The Rocky Horror Picture Show, we examine how physical touch enhances immersion by helping to break the fourth wall and by fostering audience agency. Additionally, we compare direct human touch with digitally mediated touch (e.g., haptic feedback in VR) and discuss their respective advantages and limitations. While digital touch offers flexibility and scalability, it often lacks the warmth (both literally and metaphorically), texture, and emotional nuance of actual human interaction and can struggle to reproduce the social meaning and attribution that shape affective touch. The review also highlights a number of the key challenges and boundary conditions in implementing physical touch in the context of entertainment, such as cultural variations in norms and comfort around interpersonal touch, privacy/consent concerns, hygiene concerns, and technical constraints. Future research directions include the integration of physical touch with emerging technologies, personalization of touch-based experiences, and the role of multisensory interactions in enhancing immersive storytelling. Understanding the mechanisms and impact of physical touch in entertainment can inform the design of future multisensory experiences, increasing audience engagement and emotional connectivity while minimizing harm and exclusion.
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.