The Impact of Task Context on Pleasantness and Softness Estimations: A Study Based on Three Touch Strategies

Overview

Journal Behav Sci (Basel)

Date 2025 Jan 24

PMID 39851867

Authors

Binyue Gao

Yinghua Yu

Yoshimichi Ejima

Jinglong Wu

Jiajia Yang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

This study investigated the two distinct perceptions (pleasantness and softness) of deformable stimuli with different degrees of compliance under conditions with and without a contextual task. Three tactile strategies-grasping, pinching, and pressing-were used to perceive the stimuli. In Experiment 1 (without a contextual task), participants estimated the perceived intensity of softness or pleasantness for each stimulus. In Experiment 2 (with a contextual task), the participants sequentially perceived two stimuli with different compliance levels and indicated which stimulus they perceived as softer and pleasant. The results showed that the psychophysical relationship between compliance and perceived softness was consistent across all tactile strategies in both experiments, with softness estimates increasing as compliance increased. However, the relationship between compliance and pleasantness differed between the two experiments. In Experiment 1, pleasantness estimates increased monotonically with increased compliance. However, in Experiment 2, across all tactile strategies, pleasantness began to decrease within the compliance range of 0.25-2.0 cm/N, exhibiting an inverted U-shaped trend. These findings indicate that the relationship between compliance and pleasantness is task-dependent, particularly demonstrating significantly different trends when a contextual task is introduced. In contrast, the relationship between compliance and softness remained consistently monotonic.

References

Drewing K, Weyel C, Celebi H, Kaya D . Systematic Relations between Affective and Sensory Material Dimensions in Touch. IEEE Trans Haptics. 2018; 11(4):611-622. DOI: 10.1109/TOH.2018.2836427. View

Smith C, Ellsworth P . Patterns of cognitive appraisal in emotion. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1985; 48(4):813-38. View

Etzi R, Zampini M, Juravle G, Gallace A . Emotional visual stimuli affect the evaluation of tactile stimuli presented on the arms but not the related electrodermal responses. Exp Brain Res. 2018; 236(12):3391-3403. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-018-5386-0. View

Ravaja N, Harjunen V, Ahmed I, Jacucci G, Spape M . Feeling Touched: Emotional Modulation of Somatosensory Potentials to Interpersonal Touch. Sci Rep. 2017; 7:40504. PMC: 5228183. DOI: 10.1038/srep40504. View

Kitada R, Sadato N, Lederman S . Tactile perception of nonpainful unpleasantness in relation to perceived roughness: effects of inter-element spacing and speed of relative motion of rigid 2-D raised-dot patterns at two body loci. Perception. 2012; 41(2):204-20. DOI: 10.1068/p7168. View

McGlone F, Wessberg J, Olausson H . Discriminative and affective touch: sensing and feeling. Neuron. 2014; 82(4):737-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2014.05.001. View

Scilingo E, Bianchi M, Grioli G, Bicchi A . Rendering Softness: Integration of Kinesthetic and Cutaneous Information in a Haptic Device. IEEE Trans Haptics. 2010; 3(2):109-118. DOI: 10.1109/TOH.2010.2. View

Pasqualotto A, Ng M, Tan Z, Kitada R . Tactile perception of pleasantness in relation to perceived softness. Sci Rep. 2020; 10(1):11189. PMC: 7341757. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-68034-x. View

LaMotte R . Softness discrimination with a tool. J Neurophysiol. 2000; 83(4):1777-86. DOI: 10.1152/jn.2000.83.4.1777. View

10.

Motzkin J, Philippi C, Wolf R, Baskaya M, Koenigs M . Ventromedial prefrontal cortex is critical for the regulation of amygdala activity in humans. Biol Psychiatry. 2014; 77(3):276-284. PMC: 4145052. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2014.02.014. View

11.

Kitada R, Ng M, Tan Z, Lee X, Kochiyama T . Physical correlates of human-like softness elicit high tactile pleasantness. Sci Rep. 2021; 11(1):16510. PMC: 8363669. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-021-96044-w. View

12.

Gothard K, Fuglevand A . The role of the amygdala in processing social and affective touch. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2022; 43:46-53. PMC: 9119433. DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2021.08.004. View

13.

Friedman R, Hester K, Green B, LaMotte R . Magnitude estimation of softness. Exp Brain Res. 2008; 191(2):133-42. PMC: 2574806. DOI: 10.1007/s00221-008-1507-5. View

14.

Bergmann Tiest W, Kappers A . Cues for Haptic Perception of Compliance. IEEE Trans Haptics. 2009; 2(4):189-199. DOI: 10.1109/TOH.2009.16. View

15.

Xu C, He H, Hauser S, Gerling G . Tactile Exploration Strategies With Natural Compliant Objects Elicit Virtual Stiffness Cues. IEEE Trans Haptics. 2019; 13(1):4-10. PMC: 7147988. DOI: 10.1109/TOH.2019.2959767. View

16.

Jakesch M, Carbon C . The mere exposure effect in the domain of haptics. PLoS One. 2012; 7(2):e31215. PMC: 3275618. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031215. View

17.

Alexander L, Wood C, Roberts A . The ventromedial prefrontal cortex and emotion regulation: lost in translation?. J Physiol. 2022; 601(1):37-50. PMC: 10084434. DOI: 10.1113/JP282627. View

18.

Kitada R, Doizaki R, Kwon J, Tanigawa T, Nakagawa E, Kochiyama T . Brain networks underlying tactile softness perception: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study. Neuroimage. 2019; 197:156-166. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.04.044. View

19.

Hertenstein M, Holmes R, McCullough M, Keltner D . The communication of emotion via touch. Emotion. 2009; 9(4):566-73. DOI: 10.1037/a0016108. View

20.

Guest S, Dessirier J, Mehrabyan A, McGlone F, Essick G, Gescheider G . The development and validation of sensory and emotional scales of touch perception. Atten Percept Psychophys. 2011; 73(2):531-50. DOI: 10.3758/s13414-010-0037-y. View