Talk to us about your skin: The relationship between spoken language and haptic exploratory procedures

To enhance satisfaction, the cosmetics industry needs to clearly understand consumers' descriptions of their key tactile preferences. It is difficult for researchers to understand verbal descriptions from people whose native language is different from their own. Previous research has implied that some sensory words with the same lexical meanings have been observed in different haptic exploratory procedures (HEPs). Therefore, our study aims to investigate and understand the key tactile perceptions of people from five different countries based on their descriptions and their HEPs.

In Experiment 1, 1545 participants living in the US, Japan, China, Italy, and Thailand described their major tactile perceptions as efficacy in skincare, and we analysed the frequency of each word used in their answers. In Experiment 2, we confirmed the task to observe HEPs for Chinese, Italian, and Thai participants. A total of 24 participants in China, 33 participants in Italy, and 30 participants in Thailand freely explored their faces with their hands and answered which side more closely matched the major tactile adjectives. Experts classified the observed HEPs into six classifications within two categories and three contact area sizes and investigated the cultural differences.

More than 2% of the Chinese, Italian, Thai, US, and Japanese participants described 33, 20, 29, 22, and 18 words, respectively, as efficacy in skincare. Verified words that described the major tactile perceptions in each native language had the same meanings as moistness, firmness, softness, smoothness, and so on. We could confirm the HEPs of these major feelings for the participants from each culture. Chinese and Thai participants' HEPs for moistness or softness were observed with a pressing movement. Conversely, Italian participants' HEPs for moistness or softness were observed with a rubbing movement.

This study showed that words with the same lexical meanings evoked different HEPs. The results imply that different HEPs can provide different physical stimuli on the skin. Therefore, it is important to survey both objects and HEPs to better understand the tactile experience.