TY - JOUR
T1 - Vicarious Touch
T2 - A Potential Substitute for Social Touch During Touch Deprivation
AU - Kirsch, Louise P
AU - von Mohr Ballina, Mariana
AU - Koukoustakis, Athanasios
AU - Fotopoulou, Aikaterini
PY - 2025/9/7
Y1 - 2025/9/7
N2 - Restricted interpersonal touch experiences, for instance due to COVID-19 social distancing measures, result in detrimental effects on anxiety, loneliness and psychological well-being. Yet, interventions capable of mitigating the impact of social touch deprivation, as experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, remain insufficient. In this study, conducted during a period of enforced physical distancing and touch deprivation, we investigated whether prosocial, vicarious (i.e., visually seen) touch during interactions involving human–human touch and human–pet touch, compared to human–robot touch, could alleviate self-reported feelings of stress. To this end, 1490 participants completed an online video-viewing task in which they self-reported their stress level before and after viewing video clips depicting prosocial tactile interactions. Main findings suggest that vicarious human–pet touch was especially effective in reducing perceived stress, followed by human–human touch, whereas human–robot touch surprisingly increased stress levels. This pattern reveals a novel dissociation between the calming potential of human–animal versus human–human interactions and highlights potential limits of artificial agents in replicating the emotional benefits of real social touch. Moreover, the extent of the calming effect provided by vicarious touch depended on individual differences, including participants’ anxiety states and personal preferences regarding the perceived pleasantness and awkwardness of the video clips. In particular, individuals experiencing higher levels of anxiety prior to watching interactions exhibited a more pronounced calming response to vicarious human–pet touch. Altogether, these findings underscore the significant role of social vicarious touch in a context where actual, somatosensory touch is lacking and warrant the development of further randomised, controlled testing of related interventions for conditions of physical distancing.
AB - Restricted interpersonal touch experiences, for instance due to COVID-19 social distancing measures, result in detrimental effects on anxiety, loneliness and psychological well-being. Yet, interventions capable of mitigating the impact of social touch deprivation, as experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, remain insufficient. In this study, conducted during a period of enforced physical distancing and touch deprivation, we investigated whether prosocial, vicarious (i.e., visually seen) touch during interactions involving human–human touch and human–pet touch, compared to human–robot touch, could alleviate self-reported feelings of stress. To this end, 1490 participants completed an online video-viewing task in which they self-reported their stress level before and after viewing video clips depicting prosocial tactile interactions. Main findings suggest that vicarious human–pet touch was especially effective in reducing perceived stress, followed by human–human touch, whereas human–robot touch surprisingly increased stress levels. This pattern reveals a novel dissociation between the calming potential of human–animal versus human–human interactions and highlights potential limits of artificial agents in replicating the emotional benefits of real social touch. Moreover, the extent of the calming effect provided by vicarious touch depended on individual differences, including participants’ anxiety states and personal preferences regarding the perceived pleasantness and awkwardness of the video clips. In particular, individuals experiencing higher levels of anxiety prior to watching interactions exhibited a more pronounced calming response to vicarious human–pet touch. Altogether, these findings underscore the significant role of social vicarious touch in a context where actual, somatosensory touch is lacking and warrant the development of further randomised, controlled testing of related interventions for conditions of physical distancing.
U2 - 10.1002/ejsp.70022
DO - 10.1002/ejsp.70022
M3 - Article
SN - 0046-2772
JO - European Journal of Social Psychology
JF - European Journal of Social Psychology
ER -
