Next Article in Journal
Optimizing EMG Classification through Metaheuristic Algorithms
Previous Article in Journal
Self-Directed and Self-Designed Learning: Integrating Imperative Topics in the Case of COVID-19
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Technologies
Volume 11
Issue 4
10.3390/technologies11040086
technologies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Enhancement of Handshake Attraction through Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Multimodal Stimulation

by
Taishu Kumagai
and
Yoshimune Nonomura
*
Department of Applied Chemistry, Chemical Engineering, and Biochemical Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Engineering, Yamagata University, 4-3-16 Jonan, Yonezawa 992-8510, Japan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Technologies 2023, 11(4), 86; https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11040086
Submission received: 3 June 2023 / Revised: 17 June 2023 / Accepted: 30 June 2023 / Published: 1 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Information and Communication Technologies)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
“Handshaking parties”, where pop idols shake hands with fans, can be exciting. The multimodal stimulation of tactile, visual, and auditory sensations can be captivating. In this study, we presented subjects with stimuli eliciting three sensory responses: tactile, visual, and auditory sensations. We found that the attraction scores of subjects increased because they felt the smoothness and obtained a human-like sensory experience grasping a grip handle covered with artificial skin, faux fur, and abrasive cloth with their dominant hand as they looked at a picture of a pop idol or listened to a song. When no pictures or songs were presented, a simple feeling of slight warmth was correlated with the attraction score. Results suggest that multimodal stimuli alter tactile sensations and the feelings evoked. This finding may be useful for designing materials that activate the human mind through tactile sensation and for developing humanoid robots and virtual reality systems.

1. Introduction

Shaking hands with the pop idol of your dreams—what a wonderful moment! Pop stars in Japan hold “handshaking parties”, where they shake hands with fans who have purchased their music and talk with them briefly; fans form long lines, and hit songs of their idols are played while they wait. According to a mathematical model of the relationship between pop idols and their fans, handshaking parties are important for direct communication between them [1].
Handshakes can bring a variety of feelings. People who shake hands feel more familiar compared with those who just meet and exchange a few words [2]. Burgoon et al. measured the emotional responses of subjects to seven types of physical contact, including shaking hands, grabbing hands, and touching forearms, and found that trust, affection, and composure scores were the highest with handshakes [3]. Chaplin et al. found that a firm handshake is related positively to extraversion and emotional expressiveness and negatively to shyness and neuroticism [4]. Handshakes enhance feelings of satisfaction, extraversion, and affirmation and induce economic risk-taking [5,6,7,8].
We believe that tactile stimulation is one of the most important factors in emotional activation that is triggered by shaking hands with a pop idol. Shipps et al. reported that many subjects felt strong arousal during handshakes, and this feeling correlated positively with tactile sensations such as warmth and dryness [9]. Warmth evokes positive impressions: two groups of participants who evaluated the same person rated the person holding a hot coffee as kinder and more generous [10]. The Japanese word nukumori signifies “slight warmth” and is defined as “a beautified feeling of soft, faint warmth on contact with the skin” [11]. This tactile sensation is attractive to many Japanese people. Recently, we triggered this tactile sensation by having subjects touch fur or cowhide and found that it was related to softness and warmth [12]. The desirability of handshakes is related to the softness, smoothness, and warmth of the human skin [13].
The tactile sensation of the human skin is influenced by factors such as friction, wettability, elasticity, and surface topography. Egawa et al. evaluated the friction and tactile sensation of human forearms and found that the friction coefficient increased as the amount of water in the stratum corneum increased; in addition, these changes correlated highly with tactile sensations such as dryness, freshness, and moistness [14]. Researchers showed that the texture of the human skin is characterized by smoothness, moistness, and softness and that these tactile sensations are related to physical properties such as surface shape, friction, wettability, and elastic modulus [15]; they also showed that the tactile sensations of fur and wood are highly attractive because of their large surface roughness and low friction force [16].
As noted above, handshaking parties bring fans close to their idols, close enough to chat, with the artists’ hit songs being played in the background. At these parties, the mind is activated not only by the tactile sensation but also by the visual and auditory stimuli. In particular, the perception of humanity correlates strongly with attraction. In random presentations of images of people, animals, and objects, attraction correlated with anthropomorphism: the attraction score was higher when the presented images were more human-like [17].
Separately, auditory stimulation activates the human mind, and attractive stimuli can also change people’s physiological phenomena and behaviors. Garlin et al. studied the effects of background music (BGM) on human feelings and found that it gave people pleasure and that its tempo significantly aroused people’s feelings [18], and subjects asked to choose between two images tended to gaze more toward the attractive image [19]. Slower BGM also slowed the pace of grocery shopping; shoppers stayed longer when the BGM was slow [20].
When incoming stimuli activate multiple senses, it is necessary to consider possible cross-modal effects in which one sense interferes with how the others receive the information. In general, cross-modal phenomena occur in near-body spaces because multisensory neuronal activity is strong in these areas [21]. Multisensory neurons encode the locations of sensory stimuli around the body to generate appropriate motor responses [22]; the strength of the neuronal activity is inversely proportional to the distance between the presenting stimulus and the body part and is stronger when the stimulus is near the body [23]. One of the most famous cross-modal effects of tactile and visual stimuli in the near-body space is the “rubber hand illusion” [24]: when your hand and a rubber hand are stimulated in sync in an environment where you cannot see your hand, you feel the rubber hand as if it were your own. Researchers have also reported cross-modal phenomena between tactile and auditory stimuli: when sound was played from speakers located either near or distant from a subject while the subject received electrical stimulation to a hand, the subject responded to the current more quickly when the sound came from the inner speaker [25].
A handshaking party induces strong feelings of attraction toward pop idols and grants pleasure through tactile stimuli. Other sensory information, such as visual and auditory senses, can also reinforce such psychological phenomena. We performed the following investigations to test this hypothesis: We evaluated the sensations and feelings of people meeting a pop idol at a handshaking party and clarified the multisensory effects of tactile, visual, and auditory stimuli and the relationship between feelings and behavior. For the experiment, we tested the subjects under four conditions: T: only a tactile stimulus was applied during the handshake; TV (tactile/visual): participants shook hands while viewing a picture; TA (tactile/auditory): participants shook hands while listening to a song; and TVA (tactile/visual/auditory): participants shook hands while looking at a picture and listening to a song (Figure 1). We chose songs as the auditory stimulus in this study because hit songs by pop idols were almost always played as background music, which influences the psychology of the people at handshaking parties. Figure 2 shows a device we used to evaluate the physical parameters, in particular grip force and grip time while grasping, to show the effects of applying tactile stimuli to the palm. We covered an instrumented grip handle with elastic artificial skin, soft faux fur, or uneven abrasive cloth. We then showed a picture of a pop idol and played music to confirm the multisensory effects. The findings of this study will enhance our comprehension of factors that influence tactile sensations and evoke strong feelings under multimodal conditions. The results will also aid the development of robotics and entertainment technologies to regulate feelings.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

To show the influence of tactile sensation on the attraction of a handshake, the surface of the grip handle was coated with three materials: artificial skin S (BIOSKIN PLATE #30, Burex Corporation, Saitama, Japan), faux fur F (faux fur, 100% polyester, Fujiku Co., 100%, Fujihisa Co., Ltd., Aichi, Japan), or abrasive cloth A (particle size 40, Noritake Coated Abrasive Co., Ltd., Aichi, Japan).

2.2. Grip Force Evaluation Device

We developed a device to measure the force in the process of shaking hands, as shown in Figure 2. In this apparatus, gripping forces (Fz1 and Fz2) were measured using strain gauges (KFGS-5-120-C1-16L1M2R, Kyowa Dengyo Co., Ltd., Tokyo, Japan) attached to two plate springs (SUS304) installed at the top and bottom of the apparatus when the subject grasped the grip handle. These gauges were connected to a PC (VW2000, Keyence, Tokyo, Japan) via a data logger unit (NR-500 and NR-ST04, Keyence, Tokyo, Japan). The sampling rate was 2 m s−1. To remove noise, the obtained grasp force data were processed by a low-pass filter with a cut-off frequency of 49 Hz (ORIGIN8.6, OriginLab Corp., Northampton, MA, USA).

2.3. Sensory Evaluation

We conducted the sensory evaluation with 15 men and 15 women in a quiet room at 25 ± 1 °C and 50 ± 5% humidity (see Figure 1 for the experimental setup). All subjects were students at Yamagata University and were 20–24 years old. For the TV, TA, and TVA conditions of the experiment, we showed participants a picture of Miku Kanamura (aged 18 years in 2020) of the idol group HINATA-ZAKA 46 (Sony Music Solutions Inc., Tokyo, Japan) on the monitor and/or played the group’s hit song “KYUN” (SRCL-11127, Sony Music Labels Inc., Tokyo, Japan). We selected HINATA-ZAKA 46 because this group was most representative of Japan’s pop idols in 2020. Many Japanese young people knew their songs and admired them. In addition, we chose Miku Kanamura, the most popular and renowned of the group’s nine members. As of 2020, the girls have released four compact discs, each of which sold more than 400,000 copies in the week of its release. Their official YouTube channel has aggregated 131.4 million views of their videos.
Meanwhile, under the T condition, we presented neither pictures nor music. Under TV, respondents gripped the device while they looked at the picture, and under TA, they listened to the song at the same time. To eliminate the effect of the order, we randomized the order of the 12 different assessments using a random number table.
Before the experiments, subjects washed both hands with commercial hand soap and waited in the evaluation room for 20 min to acclimatize their fingertips. Subjects grasped the evaluation device, which was covered with artificial skin, faux fur, or abrasive cloth, with their dominant hand under T, TV, TA, or TVA conditions and answered six questions about sensation and feeling. Q1: “When you shook the hand, did you feel any kind of attraction?” Q2: “Why did you feel that way?” Q3: “When you shook the hand, did you feel the same as when you shake hands with a human?” Q4: “When you shook the hand, did you feel slight warmth (nukumori)?” Q5: “What kind of tactile sensation (warm, cold, soft, hard, dry, moist, slippery, sticky, rough, or smooth) did you feel when you shook the hand?” Q6: “Please write down everything else you felt when you shook the hand.”
The sensation was evaluated based on the visual analog scale (VAS) method. The VAS method is an evaluation method in which a subject is marked on a horizontal straight line, indicating the degree of a certain sensation. Subjects were marked in the most appropriate place on a 10 cm line with “feel strong” or “not at all” written at the ends. The degree of sensation is quantified by the length between the mark and the end of “not at all”.
The Ethical Review Committee of Yamagata University confirmed that the sensory evaluation was safe for the subjects and that the psychological stress was low and gave prior approval on 28 August 2020. All methods were carried out according to guidelines and regulations that were determined by the Ethical Review Committee. All experimental protocols were approved by the committee, and informed consent was obtained from all subjects. All subjects were aged between 20 and 24 years. In addition, because the manuscript contains images that may lead to the identification of study participants, informed consent was obtained for the publication of the images in an online open-access publication.

2.4. Physical Evaluation

We measured the surface roughness, Young’s modulus, and the maximum initial heat flux (q-max), which is an index of how easily heat is lost when the material is touched, of artificial skin, faux fur, and abrasive cloth; we took all measurements three times at a room temperature of 25 ± 1 °C and a humidity of 50 ± 5%. We took the thermal conductivity and surface energy values from the literature, substituting polyurethane, polyester, and Al2O3 for the physical properties of artificial skin, faux fur, and abrasive cloth, respectively [26,27,28,29,30]. The physical measurements of surface roughness (arithmetic mean roughness Sa, maximum height Sz), Young’s modulus, and q-max were accomplished using a laser microscope LEXT OLS4000 (Olympus, Osaka, Japan), a YAWASA MSES-0512-1-SL (Tech Giken Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan), and a KES-F7 THERMOLAB (Kato Tech Co., Ltd., Kyoto, Japan), respectively.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Most of the data obtained by this study on sensory and grip force evaluations did not evince normality in the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test. Therefore, multiple comparisons of the sensory data and the mechanical data (grip force Fz and grip time t) were performed using a nonparametric method called the Friedman test adjusted by the Bonferroni method. We also conducted Spearman’s rank correlation analysis and the Friedman test to confirm the relationships between sensory data and other factors. The null hypothesis was rejected at p < 0.05. The SPSS 25.0 BASE SYSTEM (IBM, New York, NY, USA) was employed for the stated analyses.

3. Results

3.1. Sensory Evaluation

Table S1, which is included as supplementary information, and Figure 3 exhibit the attraction scores registered by the participants (Sattraction) under each condition as they held a grip covered with diverse types of surfaces. The figure shows that Sattraction was the highest (mean ± standard deviation: 7.7 ± 1.5) under STVA, where the subjects grasped the artificial skin while they looked at the idol’s picture and listened to her music. In contrast, the lowest Sattraction was observed in the AT condition at 0.5 ± 0.7 when the subjects grasped the abrasive cloth without looking at the picture or listening to the music. In TV, TA, and TVA, Sattraction was the highest for artificial skin and the lowest for abrasive cloth; in contrast, in T, Sattraction was the highest for faux fur and the lowest for abrasive cloth. These results show significant differences in attraction scores under all conditions between grasping the artificial skin, the faux fur, and the abrasive cloth. Table S2 shows p values for all statistics, for instance, showing p < 0.001 for the differences in Sattraction between STVA who grasped the artificial skin and ATVA who grasped the abrasive cloth and between FTVA who grasped the faux fur and ATVA who grasped the abrasive cloth. We also found significant differences in Sattraction for artificial skin STVA and faux fur FT and FTA (p < 0.001 and p = 0.002). Complementing the above results, we also found significant differences in attraction scores depending on the stimulus even when the subject grasped the evaluation device coated with the same material, for example, between STVA and ST (p < 0.001).
We analyzed the tactile responses of the subjects to the artificial skin, faux fur, and abrasive cloth under each condition based on the five psychophysical dimensions proposed by Okamoto et al.: rough–smooth, hard–soft, cold–warm, moist–dry, and sticky–slippery [31]. Figure 4 and Table S1 show the tactile dimension scores for artificial skin, faux fur, and abrasive cloth under T, TV, TA, and TVA conditions, respectively. We set 6.0 as the sensory evaluation score for salient characteristics and found the following for each material: The characteristic dimensions were soft, smooth, moist, and sticky for the artificial skin; soft and warm for faux fur; and hard, rough, and dry for the abrasive cloth, independent of the combination of sensory stimuli.

3.2. Grip Force

Figure 5 shows a typical temporal grip force profile according to the following physical parameters:
Maximum grip force (Fzmax): maximum force generated during gripping (sum of Fz1 + Fz2 in Figure 2).
Average grip force (Fzave): average grip force from the beginning of the gripping until the force becomes zero (the average of Fz1 and Fz2 in Figure 2).
Grip time (t): time from the start to the end of gripping. The measurement begins at the temporal base moment, t = 0.
The grip force Fz increased from 5 s when the grasping began to a Fzmax value of 4 N at 7 s, while Fzave and t were 1 N and 3.2 s, respectively. We also observed interesting trends in the mechanical parameters (Table 1): Fzmax was 16 ± 15 N and 15 ± 11 N for the artificial skin under TA and TVA, respectively, and it was 12 ± 7 N and 12 ± 8 N for faux fur and abrasive cloth under TVA, respectively. Similarly, Fzmax was the highest for artificial skin and the lowest for faux fur under all conditions.

3.3. Physical Evaluation

Table 1 provides the physical properties of each material: surface roughness Sa and Sz, Young’s modulus, q-max, thermal conductivity, and surface energy. The artificial skin had the smallest Sa and the largest q-max. Faux fur had the largest surface roughness and the smallest Young’s modulus and q-max. The abrasive cloth had the largest Young’s modulus.

3.4. Dominant Factors of Attraction in Handshaking with Pop Idols under TVA Condition

Under TVA, subjects shook hands while looking at a picture and listening to music. The humanity score had the strongest correlation with the attraction score. Figure 6 shows the relationship between Sattraction and Shumanity: Sattraction increased with the surge in Shumanity. The Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient R was 0.87. This association was found to be significant in the uncorrelated test (Table S3, p < 0.001). Figure 6 shows the distributions of the data for the three materials and indicates a significant role of humanity in attraction: the artificial skin had the highest Sattraction, 4.5–10.0, and Shumanity, 1.8–10, while the abrasive cloth had the lowest at Sattraction = 0–7.5 and Shumanity = 0–7.9. In contrast, both Sattraction and Shumanity for faux fur were widely distributed in the range of 0–10.
Table S3 presents findings for exactly which tactile sensations reminded the subjects of their humanity: Shumanity correlated with smoothness, slipperiness, roughness, softness, dryness, and warmness under TVA, with R = 0.69, 0.62, 0.60, 0.57, −0.49, and 0.49, respectively. Figure 7 shows that Shumanity was the highest when smoothness was also the highest. The rank correlation coefficient R was 0.69, and the relationship was found to be significant (p < 0.001). The distributions shown in Figure 7 indicate a relationship between smoothness and humanity scores. The artificial skin had the highest Shumanity and Ssmooth = 2–10, whereas the abrasive cloth had the lowest Ssmooth, 0.0–2.4. Ssmooth for faux fur was widely distributed in the range of 0–10.

3.5. Dominant Tactile Factors of Attraction in Handshaking under the T Condition

Under T, in which subjects shook hands without being presented with a picture or music, the attraction had the strongest correlation with slight warmth (nukumori); Figure 8 shows a higher Sattraction with a higher Sslight warm. The rank correlation coefficient was significant, with R calculated at 0.79 (Table S3, p < 0.001). The scores for faux fur, which had the highest attraction, and artificial skin (second highest) were both widely distributed: faux fur [Sattraction = 0.0–8.2 and Sslight warm = 0.0–8.1] and artificial skin [Sattraction = 0.0–9.5 and Sslight warm = 0.0–7.9]. The abrasive cloth had the lowest scores: Sattraction = 0.0–2.1 and Sslight warm = 0.0–2.0.
Table S3 shows the tactile sensations that triggered a slight warmth (nukumori) in the subjects. Slight warmth (nukumori) correlated with warmth, softness, roughness, slipperiness, and moistness under T, with R = 0.62, 0.55, −0.53, 0.48, and 0.45, respectively. Figure 9 demonstrates that Sslight warm intensifies with higher warmth or softness scores. This correlation is consistent with previous findings of the involvement of warmth and softness in eliciting the sense of slight warmth (nukumori) [12]. In Figure 9, faux fur with the highest Sslight warm had Swarm = 1.0–10 and Ssoft = 5.4–10, while the abrasive cloth with the lowest Sslight warm had Swarm = 0.0–5.2 and Ssoft = 0.0–1.5. The artificial skin was widely distributed, with Swarm = 0.0–7.8 and Ssoft = 0.0–10.0.

3.6. Handshake Attraction and Behavior

We also attempted to determine how the attraction generated by a handshake affected human behavior, but we found no significant differences in Fzmax, Fzave, and t by material type or stimulus (Table 1). We categorized all 360 attraction scores into three groups in descending order: 1–120 (upper), 121–240 (middle), and 241–360 (lower) and compared the relationships among all the mechanical data and attraction. Figure 10 shows a relationship between attraction and grasp duration, with durations for the upper, middle, and lower groups being 4.3 ± 2.7 s, 4.1 ± 2.6 s, and 3.2 ± 1.5 s, respectively. We found p values of <0.05 between the upper and lower groups when the Friedman test adjusted by the Bonferroni method was applied: p values were 0.467, 0.014, and 0.467 between the lower-middle, lower-upper, and middle-upper groups, respectively.
The trend of a longer grip time with higher Sattraction aligns with previous studies: humans want to perceive more attractive objects for longer periods. Langlois et al. showed color slides of adult female faces to infants to examine how the infants responded, and they looked longer at attractive faces [32]. Aharon et al. also found that subjects spent more time looking at attractive faces than unattractive ones [33]. However, researchers have conversely found that people find others more attractive when they spend more time looking at them. Shimojo et al. showed subjects two choices of facial images and had them choose the more attractive image; many subjects judged that the image of faces they had seen for a long time was more attractive [19].

3.7. Factors Influencing Tactile Feel

Sensory evaluations revealed that the sense of attraction apropos handshakes was most strongly correlated with smoothness through humanity under the TV, TA, and TVA conditions and was associated with warmth or softness through slight warmth (nukumori) under the T conditions. We performed a Friedman test to ascertain the factors determining these three tactile sensations. The null hypothesis of no difference in smoothness for artificial skin, faux fur, or abrasive cloth was rejected, indicating that the material influences the tactile sensation (Table S4, p < 0.001). The influence of material was confirmed for warmth and softness (p < 0.001).

4. Discussion

4.1. Handshakes and Attraction

Based on multiple comparison tests and Spearman’s rank correlation analysis, we showed the relationship between attraction, perception, and physical parameters under the TVA condition, in which subjects looked at a picture and shook hands while hearing a song (Figure 11). The diagram shows higher scores for attraction and humanity if the subjects grasp the device covered in smooth material. This is held under TV and TA (Figure S1). The handshake attraction score depends on the perception of humanity under multisensory stimulation.
Many researchers have established connections between attraction and perceptions of humanity. Nowak et al. found that subjects rated presented images as more attractive when they resembled humans more because anthropomorphism correlated with attraction [17]. Westerman et al. had participants evaluate the attraction of 15 icons, and subjects gave higher attraction scores for pictures of a person, avatars, and images that resembled a person [34]. Separately, Green et al. found that people gave higher humanity and attraction scores to shorter faces with narrow chins [35].
In contrast, we found a completely different diagram of attraction through stimulation that was only tactile. Figure 12 displays a diagram for handshake attraction under T in which the sensing of slight warmth (nukumori) was high if the subjects held warm or soft material. The rank correlation yielded constant R values explaining attraction in terms of softness or warmth at 0.56 and 0.52, respectively, while R for slight warmth was computed at 0.80 (Table S3). This result suggests that the sensing of warmth does not necessarily enhance attraction and that “slight warmth (nukumori)” is desirable.

4.2. The Physical Origin of Humanity

Figure 7 shows that Shumanity increased with higher Ssmooth, particularly with the artificial skin with characteristic smoothness, and previous researchers also identified smoothness as a characteristic of humanity. Shirado et al. and Guest et al. evaluated the tactile feel of various human and artificial skins and showed that smooth feel is one of the important factors for the human skin-like texture [13,15].
What physical stimuli evoke smoothness? One dominant factor in this sensation is static versus dynamic movement. The smooth feeling is affected by the pressure distribution caused by the deformation of the skin and the surface roughness in the static motion when the subject presses an object vertically with a finger [36,37,38,39]. In contrast, the feeling is affected by the skin vibration caused by the surface roughness and the friction in the dynamic motion when the subject strokes an object horizontally. Surface roughness is related to both static and dynamic motion. As shown in Figure 7, the artificial skin with the smallest Sa, 14 μm, had a high Ssmooth value, while the abrasive cloth with a Sa value of 83 μm had a low score. In another study, Blake et al. showed that when a dot on the surface of the material was lower, the sensation was smoother [40], and Chapman et al. showed that smoothness was perceived regardless of the dot height when the distance between the dots was short [41]. Kikegawa et al. also found increasing smoothness of solid materials with decreasing surface roughness [42].
Researchers have also reported on the frictional properties of smoothness. Kawasegi et al. studied materials with a rough surface and found that participants perceived smoothness when the change in the friction force was small [43]. Shimizu et al. evaluated the tactile feel of the human skin after a skin-care cream was applied and found that the smoothness was evoked by a lower friction coefficient [44].

4.3. Effects of Multimodal Stimulation on Handshake Attraction

The relationship between attraction, perception, and physical parameters differed under the different conditions: The attraction score was related to the humanity tally under the TV, TA, and TVA conditions, and humanity was associated with slight warmth (nukumori) under T. We aimed to determine why the factors of attraction depended on the handshake conditions. Different senses are integrated into tactile stimuli in the multimodal condition, significantly altering perceptions and feelings vis-à-vis external stimuli [45]. We would like to postulate a scenario about the condition-caused differences in the factors of attraction: Multimodal stimulation enhanced certain sensations, specifically smoothness and humanity. Subjects may have more strongly sensed humanity while shaking hands as they gazed at a human face and listened to a song than when they were exposed solely to tactile stimuli. Numerous researchers have noted the significant visual and auditory influences on tactile perception [46,47,48]. Visual information is known to strongly affect a subject’s senses and judgment; an illusion may be created when tactile and visual information differ [44].
We further posit that the priming effect may not be negligible. The priming effect is defined as the influence of a preceding stimulus on the processing of a subsequent stimulus [49]. For example, Logeswaran et al. asked subjects to give impressions of three different facial images after listening to music and found that the faces looked happier when they listened to happy music beforehand and sadder when they listened to sad music beforehand [50,51]. In the present study, subjects looked at a picture of a pop idol (a visual stimulus) and/or listened to the idol’s music under TVA, TV, and TA conditions before grasping the handshake device. The music and images were presented along with the commencement of the test, and the subject was exposed to the visual and auditory stimuli for several seconds before shaking hands with the device.

5. Conclusions

For this study, we had a group of participants grasp a handshaking device covered with one of three materials while they looked at a picture of a pop idol, listened to one of the idol’s songs, or both or neither. In this study, we presented subjects with stimuli that elicited three sensory responses: tactile sensations from skin contact, visual sensations from looking at pictures, and auditory sensations from listening to music. We found that when subjects grasped an evaluation device covered with artificial skin with their dominant hand while looking at a picture of a pop idol or listening to a song, their attraction scores increased due to the smooth feel and human-like feeling. On the other hand, when no pictures or songs were presented, a simple feeling of slight warmth (nukumori) correlated with the attraction score. The attractiveness of the handshake evoked by tactile stimuli was enhanced by visual and auditory stimuli and was highest when all three senses were combined. The stated propositions remain hypotheses for the present. The postulations must be further tested through more systematic experiments.
This interdisciplinary study analyzed the handshake, a greeting exhibiting friendship, from both psychological and physical perspectives. In particular, we focused on the specific situation of a handshaking party and discovered a new attribute: attraction is enhanced through multimodal stimulation via the tactile, visual, and auditory senses. To the best of the author’s knowledge, such a party denoted a unique event hosted by a Japanese pop idol, and such occurrences could generate cultural anthropological value in the future. Additionally, the results of the present study could be applied to varied industrial domains, especially virtual reality and entertainment. These sectors need to construct immersive systems offering multimodal stimuli to humans that can induce strong feelings such as joy, anger, sorrow, and pleasure.
The relationships among emotional, sensory, and physical stimuli during a handshake are not completely understood. The use of virtual reality and objective measures, such as physiological responses or behavioral observations, can be useful to solve such a complex problem. Virtual reality allows for more distinct stimuli to be applied to subjects, while objective measures allow for quantitative analysis [52,53,54,55]. The findings of this study revealed materials and conditions suitable for evoking a sense of attraction and will certainly benefit the design of such novel technologies.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/technologies11040086/s1, Figure S1: Relationship diagram between attraction, humanity, tactile, and physical factors under TV condition (a) and TA condition (b). Numeric values are the rank correlation coefficient R between two factors. The dashed line indicates that certain effects are confirmed by the Friedman test. Table S1: Score of sensory evaluation; Table S2: Results of significance tests with multiple comparison analyses performed by Friedman’s method with adjustment by Bonferroni’s method; Table S3: Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient between attraction, humanity, slight warmth (nukumori), tactile factors, mechanical factors, and physical factors; Table S4: Results of the Friedman test for smooth, warm, and soft feels.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, T.K. and Y.N.; methodology, T.K. and Y.N.; validation, T.K. and Y.N.; formal analysis, T.K. and Y.N.; investigation, T.K.; resources, Y.N.; data curation, T.K. and Y.N.; writing—original draft preparation, T.K.; writing—review and editing, Y.N.; visualization, T.K. and Y.N.; project administration, Y.N.; funding acquisition, Y.N. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by YU-COE(S) program of Yamagata University and KAKENHI Grant Number 23H03482.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethical Review Committee of Yamagata University on 28 August 2020.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

Data supporting the reported results can be found in the main text and Supporting Information.

Acknowledgments

This study was partly supported by the Yamagata University YU-COE(S) program and KAKENHI Grant Number 23H03482.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Ueda, Y. Introduction to idol entertainment (1) Idol phase transition as digital disruption looms. Bull. Edogawa Univ. 2019, 29, 79–107. [Google Scholar]
  2. Burgoon, J.K.; Walther, J.B. Nonverbal expectancies and the evaluative consequences of violations. Hum. Commun. Res. 1990, 17, 232–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Burgoon, J.K. Relational message interpretations of touch, conversational distance, and posture. J. Nonverbal Behav. 1991, 15, 233–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Chaplin, W.F.; Jeffrey, B.B.; Jonathan, D.C.; Nancy, R.S.; Jennifer, L. Handshaking, gender, personality, and first impressions. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 2000, 79, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jenkins, M. The meaning of the handshake towards the end of the consultation. Br. J. Gen. Pract. 2007, 57, 324. [Google Scholar]
  6. Stewart, G.L.; Dustin, S.L.; Barrick, M.R.; Darnold, T.C. Exploring the handshake in employment interviews. J. Appl. Psychol. 2008, 93, 1139–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Levav, J.; Argo, J.J. Physical contact and financial risk taking. Psychol. Sci. 2010, 21, 804–810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Dolcos, S.; Sung, K.; Argo, J.J.; Flor-Henry, S.; Dolcos, F. The power of a handshake: Neural correlates of evaluative judgments in observed social interactions. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2012, 24, 2292–2305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Shipps, E.M.; Freeman, H.R. Handshake: Its relation to first impressions and measured personality traits. Psi Chi J. Undergrad. Res. 2003, 8, 144–148. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Williams, L.E.; Bargh, J.A. Experiencing physical warmth promotes interpersonal warmth. Science 2008, 322, 606–607. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Nakamura, A. Dictionary of Word Sensation for Japanese; Iwanami Shoten Publishers: Tokyo, Japan, 2010; p. 799. [Google Scholar]
  12. Kumagai, T.; Sakamoto, M.; Nonomura, Y. Recognition mechanism of nukumori feel under sliding motion. J. Jpn. Soc. Colour Mater. 2020, 93, 2–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Guest, S.; Essick, G.; Dessirier, J.M.; Blot, K.; Lopetcharat, K.; McGlone, F. Sensory and affective judgments of skin during inter-and intrapersonal touch. Acta Psychol. 2009, 130, 115–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Egawa, M.; Oguri, M.; Hirao, T.; Takahashi, M.; Miyakawa, M. The evaluation of skin friction using a frictional feel analyzer. Ski. Res. Technol. 2002, 8, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Shirado, H.; Nonomura, Y.; Maeno, T. Realization of human skin-like texture by emulating surface shape pattern and elastic structure. In Proceedings of the 2006 14th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, Alexandria, VA, USA, 25–26 March 2006; pp. 295–296. [Google Scholar]
  16. Miyashita, T.; Maeno, T.; Nonomura, Y. How do we recognize biological materials by touch? Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2010, 80, 176–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nowak, K.L.; Rauh, C. The influence of the avatar on online perceptions of anthropomorphism, androgyny, credibility, homophily, and attraction. J. Comput.-Mediat. Commun. 2005, 11, 153–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Garlin, F.V.; Owen, K. Setting the tone with the tune: A meta-analytic review of the effects of background music in retail settings. J. Bus. Res. 2006, 59, 755–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Shimojo, S.; Simion, C.; Shimojo, E.; Scheier, C. Gaze bias both reflects and influences preference. Nat. Neurosci. 2003, 6, 1317–1322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Milliman, R.E. Using background music to affect the behavior of supermarket shoppers. J. Mark. 1982, 46, 86–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Rizzolatti, G.; Scandolara, C.; Matelli, M.; Gentilucci, M. Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys. II. Visual responses. Behav. Brain Res. 1981, 2, 147–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Graziano, M.S.; Yaps, G.S.; Gross, C.G. Coding visual space by premotor neurons. Science 1994, 266, 1054–1057. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Làdavas, E.; Serino, A. Action–dependent plasticity in peripersonal space representations. Cogn. Neuropsychol. 2008, 25, 1099–1113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Botvinick, M.; Cohen, J. Rubber hands ‘feel’ touch that eyes see. Nature 1998, 391, 756. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Japan Society of Thermophysical Properties. Handbook of Thermophysical Properties, New Edition; Yokendo Ltd.: Bunkyo-ku, Japan, 2008; Chapters B and C. [Google Scholar]
  26. The Chemical Society of Japan (Ed.). Handbook of Chemistry, Basic Section II, 5th ed.; Maruzen: Tokyo, Japan, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  27. Brandrup, J.; Immergut, E.H. Polymer Handbook Forth Edition; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2000; Chapter VI. [Google Scholar]
  28. Hara, S.; Ikemiya, N.; Ogino, K. Surface Tensions and Densities of Molten Al2O3 and Ti2O3. Tetsu-to-Hagané 1990, 12, 2114–2151. [Google Scholar]
  29. Sakuma, A.; Tani, M.; Shinomiya, M. Evaluation of thickness and Young’s modulus of soft materials by using spherical indentation testing. Trans. JSME 2009, 75, 125–132. [Google Scholar]
  30. Canzoneri, E.; Magosso, E.; Serino, A. Dynamic sounds capture the boundaries of peripersonal space representation in humans. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, 0044306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Okamoto, S.; Nagano, H.; Yamada, Y. Psychophysical dimensions of tactile perception of textures. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2013, 6, 81–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Langlois, J.H.; Roggman, L.A.; Casey, R.J.; Ritter, J.M.; Rieser-Danner, L.A.; Jenkins, V.Y. Infant preferences for attractive faces: Rudiments of a stereotype? Dev. Psychol. 1987, 23, 363–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Aharon, I.; Etcoff, N.; Ariely, D.; Chabris, C.F.; O’Connor, E.; Breiter, H.C. Beautiful faces have variable reward value: fMRI and behavioral evidence. Neuron 2001, 32, 537–551. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Westerman, D.; Tamborini, R.; Bowman, N.D. The effects of static avatars on impression formation across different contexts on social networking sites. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 53, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Green, R.D.; MacDorman, K.F.; Ho, C.C.; Vasudevan, S. Sensitivity to the proportions of faces that vary in human likeness. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2008, 24, 2456–2474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Lederman, S.J.; Taylor, M.M. Fingertip force, surface geometry, and the perception of roughness by active touch. Percept. Psychophys. 1972, 12, 401–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  37. Lederman, S.J. Tactile roughness of grooved surfaces: The touching process and the effects of macro- and microsurface structure. Percept. Psychophys. 1974, 16, 385–395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Hollins, M.; Risner, S.R. Evidence for the duplex theory of tactile texture. Percept. Psychophys. 2000, 6205, 695–697. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Skedung, L.; Danerlöv, K.; Olofsson, U.; Johannesson, M.C.; Aikala, M.; Kettle, J.; Arvidsson, M.; Berglund, B.; Rutland, M.W. Tactile perception: Finger friction, surface roughness and perceived coarseness. Tribol. Int. 2011, 44, 505–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Blake, D.T.; Hsiao, S.S.; Johnson, K.O. Neural coding mechanisms in tactile pattern recognition: The relative contributions of slowly and rapidly adapting mechanoreceptors to perceived roughness. J. Neurosci. 1997, 17, 7480–7489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  41. Chapman, C.E.; Sutu, A.; Meftah, E.M. Physical determinants of the shape of the psychophysical curve relating tactile roughness to raised-dot spacing: Implications for neuronal coding of roughness. J. Neurophysiol. 2013, 109, 1403–1415. [Google Scholar]
  42. Kikegawa, K.; Kuhara, R.; Kwon, J.; Sakamoto, M.; Tsuchiya, R.; Nagatani, N.; Nonomura, Y. Physical origin of a complicated tactile sensation: “Shittori feel”. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2019, 6, 190039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Kawasegi, N.; Fujii, M.; Shimizu, T.; Sekiguchi, N.; Sumioka, J.; Doi, Y. Physical properties and tactile sensory perception of microtextured molded plastics. Precis. Eng. 2014, 38, 292–299. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Shimizu, R.; Nonomura, Y. Preparation of artificial skin that mimics human skin surface and mechanical properties. J. Oleo Sci. 2018, 67, 47–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Zhou, Y.D.; Fuster, J.M. Visuo-tactile cross-modal associations in cortical somatosensory cells. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2000, 97, 9777–9782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Brown, P. The characterization of bulk. Text. Res. J. 1969, 39, 395–412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Guest, S.; Catmur, C.; Lloyd, D.; Spence, C. Audiotactile interactions in roughness perception. Exp. Brain Res. 2002, 146, 161–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Ho, H.N.; Van Doorn, G.H.; Kawabe, T.; Watanabe, J.; Spence, C. Colour-temperature correspondences: When reactions to thermal stimuli are influenced by colour. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e91854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Tsakiris, M.; Haggard, P. The rubber hand illusion revisited: Visuotactile integration and self-attribution. J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. Percept. Perform. 2005, 31, 80–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Hermans, D.; Houwer, J.D.; Eelen, P. A time course analysis of the affective priming effect. Cogn. Emot. 2010, 15, 143–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Logeswaran, N.; Bhattacharya, J. Crossmodal transfer of emotion by music. Neurosci. Lett. 2009, 455, 129–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Kritikos, J.; Caravas, P.; Tzannetos, G.; Douloudi, M.; Koutsouris, D. Emotional stimulation during motor exercise: An integration to the holistic rehabilitation framework. In Proceedings of the 2019 41st Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Berlin, Germany, 23–27 July 2019; pp. 4604–4610. [Google Scholar]
  53. Kritikos, J.; Tzannetos, G.; Zoitaki, C.; Poulopoulou, S.; Koutsouris, D. Anxiety detection from electrodermal activity sensor with movement & interaction during virtual reality simulation. In Proceedings of the 2019 9th International IEEE/EMBS Conference on Neural Engineering (NER), San Francisco, CA, USA, 20–23 March 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Kritikos, J.; Zoitaki, C.; Tzannetos, G.; Mehmeti, A.; Douloudi, M.; Nikolaou, G.; Alevizopoulos, G.; Koutsouris, D. Comparison between full body motion recognition camera interaction and hand controllers. Sensors 2020, 20, 1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  55. Kritikos, J.; Alevizopoulos, G.; Koutsouris, D. Personalized virtual reality human-computer interaction for psychiatric and neurological illnesses. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2021, 12, 596980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Technologies 11 00086 g001 550
Figure 1. Evaluating sensations and feelings induced by handshaking under various conditions: (a) T—tactile stimulus; (b) TV—tactile/visual stimuli; (c) TA—tactile/auditory stimuli; and (d) TVA—tactile/visual/auditory stimuli.
Figure 1. Evaluating sensations and feelings induced by handshaking under various conditions: (a) T—tactile stimulus; (b) TV—tactile/visual stimuli; (c) TA—tactile/auditory stimuli; and (d) TVA—tactile/visual/auditory stimuli.
Technologies 11 00086 g001
Technologies 11 00086 g002 550
Figure 2. Grip force evaluation device. Overall view and a conceptual diagram.
Figure 2. Grip force evaluation device. Overall view and a conceptual diagram.
Technologies 11 00086 g002
Technologies 11 00086 g003 550
Figure 3. Attraction scores Sattraction. Materials: S—artificial skin; F—faux fur; and A—abrasive cloth. Conditions: T—blue; TV—yellow; TA—green; and TVA—pink. Small and large circles represent, respectively, the scores for all subjects and their arithmetic means.
Figure 3. Attraction scores Sattraction. Materials: S—artificial skin; F—faux fur; and A—abrasive cloth. Conditions: T—blue; TV—yellow; TA—green; and TVA—pink. Small and large circles represent, respectively, the scores for all subjects and their arithmetic means.
Technologies 11 00086 g003
Technologies 11 00086 g004 550
Figure 4. Scores of tactile dimensions for the different materials. Artificial skin (S), faux fur (F), and abrasive cloth (A). Patterns: T condition (blue), TV condition (yellow), TA condition (green), and TVA condition (red).
Figure 4. Scores of tactile dimensions for the different materials. Artificial skin (S), faux fur (F), and abrasive cloth (A). Patterns: T condition (blue), TV condition (yellow), TA condition (green), and TVA condition (red).
Technologies 11 00086 g004
Technologies 11 00086 g005 550
Figure 5. Typical temporal profile of grip force. Fzmax, Fzave, and t represent maximum grip force, average grip force, and grip duration, respectively.
Figure 5. Typical temporal profile of grip force. Fzmax, Fzave, and t represent maximum grip force, average grip force, and grip duration, respectively.
Technologies 11 00086 g005
Technologies 11 00086 g006 550
Figure 6. Correlations between humanity and attraction scores under TVA. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Figure 6. Correlations between humanity and attraction scores under TVA. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Technologies 11 00086 g006
Technologies 11 00086 g007 550
Figure 7. Correlations between humanity score and smooth feeling under TVA. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Figure 7. Correlations between humanity score and smooth feeling under TVA. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Technologies 11 00086 g007
Technologies 11 00086 g008 550
Figure 8. Relationship between scores of attraction and slight warmth. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Figure 8. Relationship between scores of attraction and slight warmth. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Technologies 11 00086 g008
Technologies 11 00086 g009 550
Figure 9. Relationship between scores of slight warmth and other tactile feels: (a) warmth and (b) softness. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Figure 9. Relationship between scores of slight warmth and other tactile feels: (a) warmth and (b) softness. Material representation: artificial skin (●), faux fur (■), and abrasive cloth (▲).
Technologies 11 00086 g009
Technologies 11 00086 g010 550
Figure 10. Grip duration values. All 360 attraction scores were categorized into three groups in descending order: Upper group, 1–120; middle, 121–240; and bottom, 241–360. *: p < 0.05.
Figure 10. Grip duration values. All 360 attraction scores were categorized into three groups in descending order: Upper group, 1–120; middle, 121–240; and bottom, 241–360. *: p < 0.05.
Technologies 11 00086 g010
Technologies 11 00086 g011 550
Figure 11. Relationships among attraction, humanity, and tactile factors under TVA conditions. Numeric values are the rank correlation coefficient R between two factors. The dashed line indicates that certain effects are confirmed by the Friedman test.
Figure 11. Relationships among attraction, humanity, and tactile factors under TVA conditions. Numeric values are the rank correlation coefficient R between two factors. The dashed line indicates that certain effects are confirmed by the Friedman test.
Technologies 11 00086 g011
Technologies 11 00086 g012 550
Figure 12. Relationships among attraction, humanity, and tactile factors under T conditions. Numeric values are the rank correlation coefficient R between two factors. The dashed line indicates that certain effects are confirmed by the Friedman test.
Figure 12. Relationships among attraction, humanity, and tactile factors under T conditions. Numeric values are the rank correlation coefficient R between two factors. The dashed line indicates that certain effects are confirmed by the Friedman test.
Technologies 11 00086 g012
Table
Table 1. Mechanical properties of grip and physical properties of the materials.
Table 1. Mechanical properties of grip and physical properties of the materials.
SampleFzmax/NFzave/Nt/sSa/µmSz/µmYoung’s
Modulus/kPa		Thermal Conductivity/
W mK−1		q-max/W cm−2Surface Tension
/mN m−1
ST14 ± 113 ± 33.8 ± 1.813.51 ± 0.94221.92 ± 26.40228.5 ± 81.60.16~0.170.229 ± 0.00436.3~39
FT10 ± 63 ± 23.4 ± 2.1203.47 ± 32.962419.42 ± 461.832.5 ± 0.50.08~0.170.034 ± 0.00144.6
AT10 ± 82 ± 23.4 ± 1.883.10 ± 16.54936.87 ± 70.837603.2 ± 554.336.00.135 ± 0.004606
STV14 ± 113 ± 34.3 ± 2.513.51 ± 0.94221.92 ± 26.40228.5 ± 81.60.16~0.170.229 ± 0.00436.3~39
FTV10 ± 62 ± 23.8 ± 2.3203.47 ± 32.962419.42 ± 461.832.5 ± 0.50.08~0.170.034 ± 0.00144.6
ATV10 ± 72 ± 23.7 ± 2.583.10 ± 16.54936.87 ± 70.837603.2 ± 554.336.00.135 ± 0.004606
STA16 ± 153 ± 34.8 ± 3.013.51 ± 0.94221.92 ± 26.40228.5 ± 81.60.16~0.170.229 ± 0.00436.3~39
FTA11 ± 72 ± 24.0 ± 2.3203.47 ± 32.962419.42 ± 461.832.5 ± 0.50.08~0.170.034 ± 0.00144.6
ATA12 ± 112 ± 23.5 ± 1.983.10 ± 16.54936.87 ± 70.837603.2 ± 554.336.00.135 ± 0.004606
STVA15 ± 113 ± 34.9 ± 2.813.51 ± 0.94221.92 ± 26.40228.5 ± 81.60.16~0.170.229 ± 0.00436.3~39
FTVA12 ± 72 ± 23.9 ± 2.3203.47 ± 32.962419.42 ± 461.832.5 ± 0.50.08~0.170.034 ± 0.00144.6
ATVA12 ± 82 ± 23.3 ± 2.583.10 ± 16.54936.87 ± 70.837603.2 ± 554.336.00.135 ± 0.004606
Fzave was 3 ± 3 N for STVA and 2 ± 2 N for both faux fur and abrasive cloth under TVA. Fzave was the highest with the artificial skin and the lowest with faux fur and the abrasive cloth under T, TV, and TA. The grip time t was 4.9 ± 2.8 s for STVA and 3.9 ± 2.3 s and 3.3 ± 2.5 s, respectively, for faux fur and abrasive cloth under TVA. The longest t was with the artificial skin, and the shortest one was with the abrasive cloth under T, TV, and TA conditions.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Kumagai, T.; Nonomura, Y. Enhancement of Handshake Attraction through Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Multimodal Stimulation. Technologies 2023, 11, 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11040086

AMA Style

Kumagai T, Nonomura Y. Enhancement of Handshake Attraction through Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Multimodal Stimulation. Technologies. 2023; 11(4):86. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11040086

Chicago/Turabian Style

Kumagai, Taishu, and Yoshimune Nonomura. 2023. "Enhancement of Handshake Attraction through Tactile, Visual, and Auditory Multimodal Stimulation" Technologies 11, no. 4: 86. https://doi.org/10.3390/technologies11040086

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop