Selected Paper

Friction at Fingertip Surface during Water Contact Process

Yoshimune Nonomura,* Rina Saito, and Akira Takahashi

Department of Biochemical Engineering, Graduate School of Science and Engineering,

Yamagata University, 4-3-16 Jonan, Yonezawa, Yamagata 992-8510

E-mail: nonoy@yz.yamagata-u.ac.jp
Received: February 24, 2015; Accepted: April 12, 2015; Web Released: April 17, 2015

Humans can sense water on a solid substrate without sliding their fingertips. In this study, 20 subjects were presented
with small amounts of pure water and aqueous solutions containing various amounts of a thickener. Many subjects
distinguished a watch glass containing water from those containing aqueous solutions of the thickener. The most
characteristic tactile texture of water reported by participants was a non-slimy feel. Furthermore, friction evaluations and
high-speed observations identified frictional resistance as a distinguishing characteristic between water and the thickened
aqueous solutions. Notably, no significant fingertip movements were observed when using a high-speed camera, although
the frictional coefficients for water (0.18), the 1.00 wt % thickened solution (0.10) and the 5.00 wt % thickened solution
(0.05) were significantly different. A regression analysis of the relationship between the tactile evaluation and friction
properties suggested that many subjects evaluated the degree of sliminess based on the fluctuation of the frictional
coefficient during contact of their fingertips with the watch glasses.

How humans sense the texture of water is an interesting
topic for both psychologists and chemists, because this char-
acteristic material is the main component of our bodies, an
essential material for life, and the most familiar liquid in our
lives. The contact of human body parts with water induces
characteristic physical and psychological reactions. Previous
studies have revealed that the tactile texture of liquids depends
on the mode of contact. The first mode is the dipping mode.
Several decades ago, researchers observed that when a human
fingertip is immersed in liquid, thermal phenomena occur at the
skin surface.1 In a study comparing the perception of liquidity
and solidity at different temperatures, the tactile texture of
water was defined as mushy, wet and oily at 0, 25, and 38 °C,
respectively. The second mode is the sliding mode. When
participants were requested to slide their fingertips across a
solid substrate covered with a liquid, the sensation of water was
determined by characteristic frictional phenomena at skin sur-
faces. This is because water dramatically alters both morpho-
logical and mechanical properties of human skin.2­4 Previously,
we observed that fingertip sliding provides a frictional stimulus
with a large acceleration by which water is easily distinguished
from other liquids.5­9 When subjects touched a glass plate
covered with small amounts of water, a strong stick-slip feel
was evoked at the skin surface.
Why does the tactile texture of water change with the mode
of contact? Clearly, fingertip movements affect the tactile feel
of solid materials, because active behaviour supplies additional
information in the form of tactile stimuli.10 During the haptic
object exploration of solid materials, humans acquire infor-
mation from exploratory procedures such as lateral motion,
pressure, static contact, and unsupported holding.11 In one
study, subjects were required to touch, feel, and press solid
surfaces with the index finger of their dominant hand.12 The
movement of the fingertips is also important for perception of
liquid materials because the friction of a solid surface covered
with a liquid material can vary as the touch speeds and loads
vary,13 which is well known to occur during natural tactile
behaviours. Additionally, Sato et al. investigated the tactile
perception of a liquid surface that could be clearly felt as a thin
line by a hand moving in the liquid, and observed that skin hair
plays an important role in perception on hairy skin.14
In the present study, we sought answers to a fundamental
question: Does the perception of water from thickened aqueous
solutions on a solid surface require active behaviour such as
fingertip sliding? In daily life, water is differentiated from
viscous liquids based on weak tactile stimuli. For example,
whether the liquid on a desk is water or thick oil can be deter-
mined by touch alone; the sliding of fingertips is not required. In
this study, we evaluated whether subjects could recognize water
in the simple contact mode. To this end, we investigated the tac-
tile sensations and mechanical forces acting on the skin surfaces
of subjects. During sensory evaluation, 20 subjects touched and
held still for 15 s their forefingers in watch glasses containing
water and seven aqueous solutions with different concentrations
of a thickener. The extent to which each solution evoked the
tactile texture of water was evaluated. Furthermore, the fingertip
movements of the participants were observed and the frictional
and vertical forces applied to the watch glasses were estimated
using an original tactile evaluation system. Understanding of
the physical origin of the tactile texture of liquid materials
will assist the design of virtual reality systems, cosmetics and
textiles, which have a high correlation with chemistry.

Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059 © 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan | 949
 Experimental (a)
Materials. Water was purified using a DX-15 demineralizer
(Kurita Water Industries Ltd.; Tokyo, Japan). The thickener
was polyquaternium-10 (O-(2-hydroxy-3-(trimethylammonio)-
propyl) hydroxy cellulose chloride, Poiz C-60H), obtained
from Kao Co. (Tokyo, Japan). Water was thickened with 0.01,
0.05, 0.10, 0.50, 1.00, 2.00, and 5.00 wt % polyquaternium-10
and mixed using a Vortex Genie 2 mixer (Scientific Industries
Inc., New York, USA). The polyquaternium-10 was dissolved
by heating the solutions at 333 K. The selected concentrations
of the thickener were based on a preliminary test performed by
three professionals.7 Of many possible thickeners, polyquater-
nium-10 was selected for the present study for the following (b)
reasons. First, Kao Co. guaranteed the safety data including
oral toxicity, mutagenic properties and environmental impact.
Second, small quantities of the thickener evoke drastic changes
in the perceived texture and viscosity of water. The vis-
cosity of the aqueous samples was measured using a differ-
ential pressure-type microVISC microviscometer (RheoSense,
Inc.; San Ramon, USA) at (25 « 1) °C. The viscosities (in
mPa s) were 0.89 (water, flow rate: 5636 s¹1), 1.03 (0.01 wt %
thickened aqueous solution at 5635 s¹1), 1.47 (0.05 wt % at
5595 s¹1), 2.08 (0.10 wt % at 5724 s¹1), 5.31 (0.50 wt % at
5200 s¹1), 11.0 (1.00 wt % at 2200 s¹1), 46.1 (2.00 wt % at
430 s¹1) and 1.03 © 103 (5.00 wt % at 160 s¹1).
Tactile Evaluations. Sensation, friction and fingertip Figure 1. Image (a) and schematic (b) of the tactile evalu-
ation system for simultaneous evaluation of the tactile
movements were simultaneously evaluated as follows. Twenty
sensation, friction properties, and movement of a fingertip.
students (10 males, 10 females; age 21­24 years) participated
in the study. Evaluations were conducted in a quiet room
at a temperature of (25 « 1) °C and a relative humidity of quantified as follows: The words in the reasons were cate-
(50 « 3)%. Prior to the evaluations, the liquid samples were gorized as 10 types of feels including hardness (hard and soft
placed in the evaluation room for more than 24 h to standardize feels), warmness (warm and cold feels), friction (slimy and
the liquid temperature at (25 « 1) °C. The subjects washed both stick-slip feels), fine roughness (rough and smooth feels), and
hands with commercial liquid hand soap and then each placed macro roughness (uneven and bulky feels), which were pro-
the forefinger of his/her dominant hand on a finger holder posed by Okamoto et al.15 The incidence rates of the above 10
that was 2 cm above the watch glass (diameter: 60 mm; depth: feels for the twenty subjects were then calculated with the rate
3 mm) containing standard water or a thickened aqueous solu- equal to 100 when all the subjects experienced that feel and 0
tion. The volume of the standard water or a thickened aqueous when none experienced a feel. After completing a question-
solution was 0.5 mL, because the amount was suitable to soak naire, the subjects again washed their hands with water, and the
the fingertip of the subjects. Each participant then put down basic process of touching the aqueous samples, completing the
and touched the watch glass with his/her forefinger for 15 s questionnaire and washing their hands was repeated for all the
(Figure 1) and was required to rest his/her fingertip in a dimple samples. During each round of evaluation, each subject touched
of the watch glass. However, the subjects were not given any the eight different samples (water and the seven thickened solu-
instructions on how hard they should press down on the watch tions) only once, and a standard water sample was evaluated
glass. Rather, they were allowed to touch the watch glass using once every three test samples. The liquids were presented in
the level of force they deemed necessary for evaluating the random order to eliminate the order effect, and the composi-
tactile texture. Each subject rated the similarity of each liquid to tions of the liquids were not revealed to the subjects. Further-
water on a visual analogue scale, with their evaluated score more, the liquid samples in the watch glasses were touched
marked as a position along a 10-cm continuous line from through a blackout curtain. Participation by all subjects was
“remarkably similar” to “remarkably different.” The similarity entirely voluntary. All evaluations adhered to the protocols of
score was estimated by the length from the end point. Spe- the Declaration of Helsinki.
cifically, the similarity score was defined as the distance Frictional Evaluation. The tactile evaluation system
between the end labelled “remarkably different” and the marker developed for this study simultaneously evaluated the tactile
as a proportion of the distance between the end points (10 cm). sensation, friction properties and movement of the fingertip
In this manner, “remarkably similar” and “remarkably differ- (Figure 1). Frictional and vertical forces were monitored using
ent” were assigned scores of 100% and 0%, respectively. strain gauges on two leaf springs. These strain gauges were
Furthermore, subjects were asked to explain the reasons for connected to a PC VW2000 (Keyence, Tokyo, Japan) through
their similarity scores. Based on the reasons, the tactile feel was a data logger unit comprising two electronic measurement

950 | Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059 © 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan
 thickener
systems (NR-500 and NR-ST04; Keyence, Tokyo, Japan). The (a) concentration 0 0.01 0.05 0.10 0.50 1.00 2.00 5.00
detection limits of the horizontal friction forces Fx and Fy, and wt%

the vertical force Fz were 3.9 © 10¹3, 2.0 © 10¹2, and 7.8 ©
10¹3 N, respectively. The ranges of the linear responses for Fx,
Fy, and Fz were 2.9 © 10¹2 to 9.8 N, 4.9 © 10¹2 to 9.8 N, and 100
2.0 © 10¹2 to 9.8 N, respectively. The frictional coefficient was
as the ratio of the frictional force to the vertical force,

similarity to water/%
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
defined 80
Fx2 þ Fy2 =Fz . The tactile evaluation system was associated
60
with a high-speed camera (VW-9000, Keyence; Tokyo, Japan)
through a PC. Data from the frictional evaluation and the high- 40
speed observations were acquired at 2-ms intervals. The spa-
tial resolution of the obtained images was approximately 200 20
¯m pixel¹1. A seal with a 2-mm-diameter black dot was placed
0
on the nail of the forefinger. The watch glass was illuminated
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
using a lamp unit (OP84310; metal halide halogen lamp viscosity/mPa s
operated at 80 W; colour temperature: 6127 K). The distance 100
moved by the fingertip was analyzed using the VW-9000 (b)
movement analysis software. 80
Statistical Analyses. Statistical analyses were performed
60

using SPSS 16.0 Base System software (IBM, New York,
USA). The significance on the effects of the viscosity on the
similarity score, frictional coefficient, and vertical force was
analyzed as follows: Null hypotheses of no linear correlation
between the independent variable (logarithmic viscosity) and
the dependent variables (similarity score, vertical force, friction
coefficient, and tactile feel) were tested. The logarithmic value
of viscosity was adopted following Fechner’s law which states
that a subjective sensation is proportional to the logarithm of
the stimulus intensity.16 Linear regression was conducted once
per-subject to obtain a least-squares estimate of the regression
slope for each dependent variable. The null hypotheses were
then tested by conducting one-sample t tests on the estimated
regression slopes; one t test was conducted for each dependent
variable. The null hypotheses were rejected when the p-value
was above 0.05.
Results
Tactile Textures of Water and the Thickened Aqueous
Solutions. The behavior of each fingertip was observed using
a high-speed camera to visualize what occurred when the
fingertip touched the watch glass containing liquid. As was
requested prior to the evaluations, the fingertips of nearly all
the subjects were straight and held still on the dimple in each
watch glass; the fingertips did not move more than several
millimetres in 142 of the 160 tests for the 8 aqueous samples
using 20 subjects.
Each of the 20 subjects determined a similarity score for the
tactile texture of each watch glass containing 0.5 mL sample
(standard water and aqueous solutions thickened with 0.01,
0.05, 0.10, 0.50, 1.00, 2.00, and 5.00 wt % polyquaternium-10).
Figure 2a plots the similarity scores for the eight liquids as
a function of the viscosity of the samples. Here the results
are expressed as means and standard deviations. Among the
liquids, water achieved the highest similarity score (77.9 «
18.2). Furthermore, the score decreased more-or-less linearly as
the thickener concentration increased, reaching a minimum of
2.2 « 3.8 at 5.00 wt %.
This negative correlation between the viscosity and the
similarity scores was observed for each subject. The regression
score/%
40
20
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
viscosity/mPa s
Figure 2. Tactile sensation of water and thickened aqueous
solutions in a watch glass. (a) Water similarity scores for
the eight liquids. The similarity scores for all the subjects
and the average similarity scores are plotted as small and
large circles, respectively. (b) Incidence rates for the most-
reported tactile sensations: slimy (circles), hard (squares),
and cold (triangles).
slope between the logarithmic values of the viscosities and
the similarity scores was thus evaluated for each individual
subject. The regression analysis provided an average subject
slope between the logarithmic values of the viscosities and the
similarity scores of ¹25.3 « 7.0, which was a non-zero value,
with a p-value of <0.001.
When the subjects were asked the reasons for their similarity
scores, they cited forty words in all. Figure 2b shows the
relationship between the viscosities of the aqueous solutions
and the incidence rates for the slimy, hard and cold feels, for
which the absolute values of the correlation coefficients were
>0.65. The correlation coefficients with similarity score were
0.68, ¹0.98, and ¹0.71, respectively. Therefore, water was
considered to be a cold, non-slimy and soft liquid.
Frictional Stimuli during Contact with Water and the
Thickened Aqueous Solutions. Next, the type of friction that
induces water-like tactile texture was investigated. Figures 3a
and 3b show the typical temporal profiles of the vertical forces
and frictional coefficients, respectively, when subject ID16
touched a watch glass containing water and solutions thickened
with 0.5 or 5.0 wt % thickener. The temporal zero point was
adjusted to the time at which a significant signal was observed
for the vertical force Fz. The force profiles exhibit a significant
saturation point at approximately 0.5­3.0 s. This profile was

Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059 © 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan | 951
 0.8 thickener
(a) (a) concentration 0 0.01 0.05 0.10 0.50 1.00 2.00 5.00
thickener concentration wt%
0wt% 2
0.6
0.5wt%
5.0wt%
force/N

0.4

force/N
0.2 1

0
0 5 10 15 20 25
time/s 0
(b) 0.2 0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
viscosity/mPa s
frictional coefficient

thickener
(b) concentration 0 0.01 0.05 0.10 0.50 1.00 2.00 5.00
wt%

0.1
0.4

0
0 5 10 15 20
time/s
Figure 3. Friction profiles during the tactile evaluation
process: temporal changes in the (a) vertical force and
(b) frictional coefficient of water and water thickened with
0.50 and 5.00 wt % polyquaternium-10.
divided into two stages: Stage 1 (from 0 s to the saturation
point) and Stage 2 (from the saturation point to 15 s). For water,
the vertical force increased from 0 to 0.5 N during Stage 1 and
fluctuated in the range from 0.4 to 0.7 N during stage 2. The
frictional coefficient fluctuated in the range from 0 to 0.15
throughout the friction test, as can be observed in Figure 3b.
The friction dynamics between the skin surface and the
liquids in the watch glass were altered as the thickener con-
centration increased. These results are also plotted in Figure 3.
Interestingly, as with water and regardless of the viscosity, the
vertical force increased during Stage 1 and fluctuated in the
range from 0.4 to 0.7 N during Stage 2. The viscosity effects
were, however, revealed in the frictional coefficients. For
example, the addition of 5 wt % polyquaternium-10 to water
reduced the coefficient to 0.03, while the coefficient fluctuated
in the range from 0 to 0.05 throughout the friction test
(Figure 3b).
Furthermore, this reduction in the frictional coefficient
increased with increasing thickener concentration. Figure 4
plots the average vertical forces and frictional coefficients for
the twenty subjects after 1­15 s of contact. Although the verti-
cal force (0.3­0.4 N) was independent of the viscosity, the
frictional coefficient decreased with increasing viscosity (0.18
and 0.05 for water and the 5.00 wt % solution, respectively).
The negative correlation between the viscosity and the fric-
tional coefficient was observed for each individual subject. The
regression slope between the viscosity and frictional coefficient
was thus evaluated for each subject separately, and the regres-
sion analysis results for the average subject was ¹0.031 «
0.016, which were significantly different from zero, and the p-
value = 0.025. On the other hand, the regression slope between
frictional coefficient
0.3
25 0.2
0.1
0
0.1 1 10 100 1000 10000
viscosity/mPa s
Figure 4. Effect of viscosity on the (a) vertical force and
(b) frictional coefficient. Friction data for all the subjects
and the average data are plotted as small and large circles,
respectively.
the viscosity and the vertical force was thus evaluated for
each subject separately, and the regression analysis results for
the average subject was ¹0.018 « 0.065 N, which were not
significantly different from zero, and the p-value = 0.390. In
addition, in Figure 4b, an initial drastic drop was observed
between the water and 0.01 wt %. This drop could be caused by
the lubrication effect due to the adsorbed thickener molecules
at the finger surface and the glass substrate.
Temperature and thermal properties are important factors
that can influence the tactile texture of liquid materials.17 In the
present study, temperature of test solutions did not show any
dependence on their viscosities (See Supporting Information).
We evaluated the temporal change of temperature at the skin
surface using a thermometer with a thermocouple sensor when
subjects touched water and thickener solutions. The temper-
ature dropped about 5 °C initially, but recovered gradually.
Viscosity of the solution was found to have no effect on the
temperature change and the rate of temperature change.
Discussion
In this study, we observed that humans can recognize the
similarity of a thickened aqueous solution to water via fingertip
contact without sliding. Sensory evaluation showed that water-
like texture was associated with cold, non-slimy and soft
sensations. In these sensations, the non-slimy feel showed the

952 | Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059 © 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan
 Table 1. Tactile Dimensions for the Contact, Sliding, and Dipping Modes
Tactile dimension
Mode
Hardness Warmness Friction
Contact
Soft Cold Non-slimy
Sliding
Stick-slip feel
Dipping
Cold
strongest correlation with the similarity score. These psycho-
logical findings were then considered from a tactile dimen-
sion viewpoint. Okamoto et al. identified five prominent psy-
chophysical dimensions for tactile texture: hardness, warmth,
friction, fine roughness, and macro roughness.15 The previously
described non-slimy sensation is analogous to the friction fac-
tor (Table 1). Notably, the factor that is related to water-like
tactile texture depends on the mode of contact. As mentioned
in the introduction, in the dipping mode, the tactile texture of
water alters with temperature when fingertips are dipped into
the liquid,1 implying that the warmness factor dominates the
dipping mode. By contrast, the frictional factor dominates the
sliding mode. Frictional stimuli with large accelerations gener-
ated by fingertip sliding are considered as tactile cues by which
humans differentiate water from other liquids.5­9 On the other
hand, three tactile dimensions, hardness, warmness, and friction
contribute to distinguish liquid materials in the contact mode:
the similarity score increased if the texture of the liquid was soft,
cold, and non-slimy. This result shows that the contact mode is
the most complicated process in the three modes.
How do the subjects recognize non-slimy sensation without
sliding their fingertips? The relationship between the tactile
evaluation and friction properties suggests that the subjects
evaluated the degree of slimy feel based on the fluctuation
of the frictional coefficient during contact of their fingertips
with the watch glasses. As shown in Figure 3b, the frictional
coefficient fluctuated in the range from of 0­0.15 for water
and 0­0.05 for 5 wt % thickener aqueous solution (Figure 3b).
Many subjects experienced a non-slimy feel when the fluctua-
tion was large, and a slimy feel when the fluctuation was small.
The origin of the fluctuation is not yet clear, but may be caused
by a weak pushing behavior of the subjects in the horizontal
direction. Such microscopic friction can be one of possible
origins of the fluctuation, because the human unconsciously
displaces the finger extremely little. A regression analysis indi-
cated a positive correlation between the mean values of the
frictional coefficients and the similarity scores, (correlation
coefficient = 0.935) that was statistically significant (signifi-
cant level p-value: <0.001). We hypothesize that the contri-
bution of the added thickener to the fluctuation may be related
to the conditions for contact between the fingertip surface and
the watch glass. It is possible that under mixed lubrication
conditions, a thin liquid film with low viscosity induces a large
friction resistance, whereas a thick film with high viscosity
behaves as a lubricant film.4 In the near future, we will verify
this assumption by direct observation of the contact conditions
between fingertips and watch glasses.
Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059
Reference
Fine roughness Macro roughness
this work
5­9
1
Conclusion
In summary, we observed that humans can recognize water
on a solid substrate without sliding their fingertips. Through
friction evaluations and high-speed observations, we demon-
strated that a characteristic frictional stimulus is sufficient to
differentiate water from a thickened aqueous solution. A water-
like tactile texture for liquids in a watch glass is evoked by a
non-slimy feel and a fluctuation of the friction resistance on
fingertip surfaces. Humans also perceive water by heat transfer
from the skin surface or by the characteristic frictional stimulus
with large acceleration in the dipping or sliding modes, respec-
tively. These findings indicate that the mechanism for water
perception depends on how the liquid is touched by a human.
However, the mechanism for the perception of water is not yet
understood. Firstly, the origin of soft and cold feels should be
investigated in future studies because these feels were found to
be correlated with the similarity score. However, significant
relationship was not observed between the viscosity and the
temperature change. More precise temporal and spatial analysis
of temperature on skin surface will be conducted for a better
understanding of skin/solution interfacial properties. Secondly,
investigation of the effect of water contact on physical and
psychological phenomena under a variety of more complicated
conditions would be valuable. Such a study would enhance our
understanding of human bimodal (visual­tactile) and self-touch
stimuli. Finally, the effect of the kind of the substrate and the
attribute of subjects should be studied, because the tactile
sensation changes with the wettability of substrate, gender, and
age of subjects.6,18,19
This study was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
Research (C) (No. 22540417) from the Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan (MEXT).
Supporting Information
Temperature evaluation. This material is available electroni-
cally on J-STAGE.
References
1 A. H. Sullivan, Am. J. Psychol. 1923, 34, 531.
2 S. Comaish, E. Bottoms, Br. J. Dermatol. 1971, 84, 37.
3 M. E. Evans, S. T. Hyde, J. R. Soc., Interface 2011, 8, 1274.
4 M. J. Adams, S. A. Johnson, P. Lefèvre, V. Lévesque, V.
Hayward, T. André, J.-L. Thonnard, J. R. Soc., Interface 2013, 10,
20120467.
5 Y. Nonomura, T. Fujii, Y. Arashi, T. Miura, T. Maeno, K.
© 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan | 953
Tashiro, Y. Kamikawa, R. Monchi, Colloids Surf., B 2009, 69, 264.
6 Y. Nonomura, Y. Arashi, T. Maeno, Colloids Surf., B 2009,
73, 80.
7 Y. Nonomura, T. Miura, T. Miyashita, Y. Asao, H. Shirado,
Y. Makino, T. Maeno, J. R. Soc., Interface 2012, 9, 1216.
8 R. Saito, M. Suzuki, T. Maeno, H. Mayama, Y. Nonomura,
Trans. Soc. Instrum. Control Eng. 2014, 50, 2.
9 Y. Nonomura, R. Saito, T. Maeno, Helen Keller problem:
tactile texture of water isn’t necessarily favorable, in Aqua
Incognita: Why Ice Floats on Water and Galileo 400 Years on,
ed. by P. Lo Nostro, B. W. Ninham, Connor Court, Ballarat, 2014,
pp. 297­310.
10 J. J. Gibson, Psychol. Rev. 1962, 69, 477.
11 S. J. Lederman, R. L. Klatzky, Cognit. Psychol. 1987, 19,
342.
12 S. Wongsriruksa, P. Howes, M. Conreen, M. Miodownik,
Mater. Des. 2012, 42, 238.
954 | Bull. Chem. Soc. Jpn. 2015, 88, 949–954 | doi:10.1246/bcsj.20150059
13 S. Guest, F. McGlone, A. Hopkinson, Z. A. Schendel, K.
Blot, G. Essick, J. Cosmet., Dermatol. Sci. Appl. 2013, 3, 66.
14 M. Sato, J. Miyake, Y. Hashimoto, H. Kajimoto, in
Haptics: Generating and Perceiving Tangible Sensations, ed. by
A. M. L. Kappers, J. B. F. van Erp, W. M. Bergmann Tiest, F. C. T.
van der Helm, Springer, Berlin, 2010, Vol. 6192, pp. 58­64.
doi:10.1007/978-3-642-14075-4_9.
15 S. Okamoto, H. Nagano, Y. Yamada, IEEE Trans. Haptics
2013, 6, 81.
16 S. S. Stevens, Science 1961, 133, 80.
17 D. Filingeri, B. Redortier, S. Hodder, G. Havenith, Neuro-
science 2014, 258, 121.
18 M. Nakatani, T. Kawasoe, M. Denda, Int. J. Cosmet. Sci.
2011, 33, 346.
19 J. C. Stevens, K. K. Choo, Somatsens. Mot. Res. 1996, 13,
153.
© 2015 The Chemical Society of Japan