↓ Skip to main content

Exploring Tactile Perceptual Dimensions Using Materials Associated with Sensory Vocabulary

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Exploring Tactile Perceptual Dimensions Using Materials Associated with Sensory Vocabulary
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, April 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00569
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maki Sakamoto, Junji Watanabe

Abstract

Considering tactile sensation when designing products is important because the decision to purchase often depends on how products feel. Numerous psychophysical studies have attempted to identify important factors that describe tactile perceptions. However, the numbers and types of major tactile dimensions reported in previous studies have varied because of differences in materials used across experiments. To obtain a more complete picture of perceptual space with regard to touch, our study focuses on using vocabulary that expresses tactile sensations as a guiding principle for collecting material samples because these types of words are expected to cover all the basic categories within tactile perceptual space. We collected 120 materials based on a variety of Japanese sound-symbolic words for tactile sensations, and used the materials to examine tactile perceptual dimensions and their associations with affective evaluations. Analysis revealed six major dimensions: "Affective evaluation and Friction," "Compliance," "Surface," "Volume," "Temperature," and "Naturalness." These dimensions include four factors that previous studies have regarded as fundamental, as well as two new factors: "Volume" and "Naturalness." Additionally, we showed that "Affective evaluation" is more closely related to the "Friction" component (slipperiness and dryness) than to other tactile perceptual features. Our study demonstrates that using vocabulary could be an effective method for selecting material samples to explore tactile perceptual space.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 70 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 20%
Student > Master 12 17%
Researcher 7 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 22 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 9 13%
Psychology 7 10%
Design 7 10%
Computer Science 5 7%
Neuroscience 3 4%
Other 13 19%
Unknown 26 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2017.
All research outputs
#14,339,070
of 22,961,203 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#15,203
of 30,113 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#173,534
of 310,037 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#381
of 558 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,961,203 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,113 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,037 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 558 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.