MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2759514186 · doi:10.1109/taffc.2017.2757491

Laughter and Tickles: Toward Novel Approaches for Emotion and Behavior Elicitation

2017· article· en· W2759514186 on OpenAlexaff
Pascal E. Fortin, Jeremy R. Cooperstock

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Affective Computing · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotion and Mood Recognition
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaughterPerceptionSensationStimulus (psychology)PsychologyCognitive psychologyArousalSocial psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Considerable effort has been invested in the development of effective emotion and behavior recognition techniques. In comparison, little work has been devoted to technologies that can be used to induce specific emotional and behavioral responses, with most such research relying on the presentation of video or images. In this article, we propose a novel technique for the elicitation of emotion based on audio-tactile stimulation. Taking advantage of the relationship between tickling, laughter and emotional states, we conducted an experiment to map the perception of the tickle sensation as a function of vibrotactile stimulation frequency, quantify the effect of hearing laughter stimulus on the perceived intensity of the tactile experience, and assess the potential of the proposed multimodal approach to induce observable mirthful responses. Experimental evidence shows that the perceived intensity of the auditory laughter stimulus has a repeatable scaling effect on the tickle sensation and that the proposed audio-tactile stimulation is a promising approach to laughter elicitation. These findings may inform the design of future multimodal affective interfaces by allowing a more informed prediction of induced emotional and behavioral responses.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Affective ComputingSame topicEmotion and Mood RecognitionFrench-language works237,207