Haptic guidance changes how humans interact with computers by using touch-based feedback to support learning, control, and decision-making. This review presents an overview of recent progress in haptic guidance systems, focusing on how different types of feedback, such as force, vibration, and movement, can be combined to create more natural and effective experiences. These technologies are now widely used in fields such as robotic surgery, rehabilitation, virtual and augmented reality, teleoperation, assistive devices, and education. The paper outlines the core components of haptic systems, including sensors, actuators, and control methods, and explains how they work together to simulate the sense of touch. It also explores different feedback strategies and how they help users perform complex tasks more safely and accurately. Despite these advancements, several challenges remain. These include delays in system response, limited portability, high cost, and difficulty adapting to different users. There are also important ethical concerns, such as privacy, accessibility, and over-reliance on technology. The review highlights current trends, such as the use of artificial intelligence, soft materials, and wearable devices, which are helping to make haptic systems smarter, smaller, and more personalized. Future work should focus on making these systems more affordable, inclusive and reliable, especially for long-term and real-world use. With continued progress, haptic guidance has the potential to greatly enhance how people learn, work, and interact across digital and physical environments.
CulbertsonHSchorrSBOkamuraAM.Haptics: the present and future of artificial touch sensation. Annu Rev Control Robot Auton Syst2018; 1(1): 385–409.
2.
AbiriAPensaJTaoA, et al. Multi-modal haptic feedback for grip force reduction in robotic surgery. Sci Rep2019; 9(1): 5016.
3.
SrinivasanMABasdoganC.Haptic interfaces for virtual environments and teleoperator systems. Proc IEEE1995; 87(3): 357–374.
4.
ColgateJEStanleyMCBrownJM. Issues in the haptic display of tool use. In: Proceedings 1995 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems. Human robot interaction and cooperative robots, 1995, vol. 3, pp.140–145. IEEE.
5.
FeyginDKeehnerMTendickR. Haptic guidance: experimental evaluation of a haptic training method for a perceptual motor skill. In: Proceedings 10th symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems. HAPTICS 2002, 2002, pp. 40–47. IEEE.
6.
ColesTRMeglanDJohnNW.The role of haptics in medical training simulators: a survey of the state of the art. IEEE Trans Haptics2011; 4(1): 51–66.
7.
TeatherRJNatapovDJenkinM.Evaluating haptic feedback in virtual environments using ISO 9241–9. In: 2010 IEEE virtual reality conference (VR), 2010, pp.307–308. IEEE.
8.
GoertzRC.Master-slave manipulator. Vol. 2635. Argonne National Laboratory, 1949.
9.
MassieTH.Design of a three degree of freedom force-reflecting haptic interface. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1993.
10.
BurdeaGC.Force and touch feedback for virtual reality. John Wiley & Sons, Inc, 1996.
11.
SrinivasanMABasdoganC.Haptics in virtual environments: taxonomy, research status, and challenges. Comput Graph1997; 21(4): 393–404.
12.
LécuyerABurkhardtJMEtienneL. Feeling bumps and holes without a haptic interface: the perception of pseudo-haptic textures. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, April 2004, pp.239–246.
KuchenbeckerKJParkJGNiemeyerG. Characterizing the human wrist for improved haptic interaction. In: ASME international mechanical engineering congress and exposition, 2003, vol. 37130, pp.591–598.
17.
BurdeaGC. Keynote address: haptics feedback for virtual reality. In: Proceedings of international workshop on virtual prototyping, Laval, France, 1999, pp.87–96.
18.
Elsevier. Scopus search results for haptic guidance and human-computer interaction, https://www.scopus.com/ (2025, accessed 15 June 2025).
19.
GalambosP.Vibrotactile feedback for haptics and telemanipulation: survey, concept and experiment. Acta Polytechnica Hung2012; 9(1): 41–65.
20.
AsanoSOkamotoSMatsuuraY, et al. Toward quality texture display: vibrotactile stimuli to modify material roughness sensations. Adv Robot2014; 28(16): 1079–1089.
21.
RuspiniDCKolarovKKhatibO. Haptic interaction in virtual environments. In: Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robot and systems. Innovative robotics for real-world applications. IROS’97, 1997, vol. 1, pp.128–133. IEEE.
22.
KyungKULeeJYParkJS. Comparison of force, tactile and vibrotactile feedback for texture representation using a combined haptic feedback interface. In: Haptic and audio interaction design: second international workshop, HAID 2007, 2007 proceedings 2, Seoul, South Korea, 29–30 November 2007, pp.34–43. Springer.
23.
AdelsteinBDRosenMJ, et al. Design and implementation of a force reflecting manipulandum for manual control research. ASME Adv Robot1992; 42: 1–12.
24.
YangTKimJRJinH, et al. Recent advances and opportunities of active materials for haptic technologies in virtual and augmented reality. Adv Funct Mater2021; 31(39): 2008831.
25.
ChouvardasVGMiliouANHatalisMK.Tactile displays: overview and recent advances. Displays2008; 29(3): 185–194.
26.
JiaSSantosVJ.Tactile perception for teleoperated robotic exploration within granular media. ACM Trans Human-Robot Interact2021; 10(4): 1–27.
27.
ForsythBAMacLeanKE.Predictive haptic guidance: intelligent user assistance for the control of dynamic tasks. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph2006; 12(1): 103–113.
28.
De MariaGNataleCPirozziS. Force/tactile sensor for robotic applications. Sens Actuators A Phys2012; 175: 60–72.
GregoryALinMCGottschalkS, et al. A framework for fast and accurate collision detection for haptic interaction. In: ACM SIGGRAPH 2005 courses, 2005, p.34. ACM.
31.
PrattichizzoDChinelloFPacchierottiC, et al. Towards wearability in fingertip haptics: a 3-dof wearable device for cutaneous force feedback. IEEE Trans Haptics2013; 6(4): 506–516.
32.
OkamuraAM.Methods for haptic feedback in teleoperated robot-assisted surgery. Ind Rob Int J2004; 31(6): 499–508.
33.
TavakoliMPatelRVMoallemM.Haptics for teleoperated surgical robotic systems. Proc IEEE2008; 96(1): 1261–1270.
34.
MalikHARasoolSMaqsoodA, et al. Effect of haptic feedback on pilot/operator performance during flight simulation. Appl Sci2020; 10(11): 3877.
35.
ChoukouMAMbabaaliSBani HaniJ, et al. Haptic-enabled hand rehabilitation in stroke patients: a scoping review. Appl Sci2021; 11(8): 3712.
36.
AndaluzVHSalazarPJEscuderoVM, et al. Virtual reality integration with force feedback in upper limb rehabilitation. In: Advances in visual computing: 12th international symposium, ISVC 2016, proceedings, part II 12, Las Vegas, NV, USA, 12–14 December 2016, pp.259–268. Springer.
37.
RückertPSieversTSEwersJ, et al. Adaptive tool replicas with haptic feedback for increased presence perception in virtual reality. Procedia CIRP2024; 130: 797–801.
38.
GongYMat HusinHErolE, et al. Airotouch: enhancing telerobotic assembly through naturalistic haptic feedback of tool vibrations. Front Rob AI2024; 11: 1355205.
39.
KoskinenEKaaresojaTLaitinenP. Feel-good touch: finding the most pleasant tactile feedback for a mobile touch screen button. In: Proceedings of the 10th international conference on multimodal interfaces, October 2008, pp.297–304.
40.
JungSWuYMcKeeR, et al. All shook up: the impact of floor vibration in symmetric and asymmetric immersive multi-user VR gaming experiences. In: 2022 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR), 2022, pp.737–745. IEEE.
41.
ChessaMMaielloGBorsariA, et al. The perceptual quality of the oculus rift for immersive virtual reality. Hum Interact2019; 34(1): 51–82.
42.
HeldJPKlaassenBvan BeijnumBF, et al. Usability evaluation of a vibrotactile feedback system in stroke subjects. Front Bioeng Biotechnol2016; 4: 98.
43.
IslamMSLimS.Vibrotactile feedback in virtual motor learning: a systematic review. Appl Ergon2022; 101: 103694.
44.
FilgueirasTSLimaACOBaimaRL, et al. Vibrotactile sensory substitution on personal navigation: remotely controlled vibrotactile feedback wearable system to aid visually impaired. In: 2016 IEEE international symposium on medical measurements and applications (MeMeA), 2016, pp.1–5. IEEE.
45.
ScheggiSTalaricoAPrattichizzoD.A remote guidance system for blind and visually impaired people via vibrotactile haptic feedback. In: 22nd Mediterranean conference on control and automation, 2022, pp.20–23. IEEE.
46.
ManawaduUEKamezakiMIshikawaM, et al. A haptic feedback driver-vehicle interface for controlling lateral and longitudinal motions of autonomous vehicles. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics (AIM), 2016, pp.119–124. IEEE.
47.
ZhaoLLiuYYeD, et al. Implementation and evaluation of touch-based interaction using electrovibration haptic feedback in virtual environments. In: 2020 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR), 2020, pp.239–247. IEEE.
48.
GiordanoMSullivanJWanderleyMM.Design of vibrotactile feedback and stimulation for music performance. In: Papetti S and Saitis C (eds.) Musical haptics2018, Springer Series on Touch and Haptic Systems.
49.
De SantisDZenzeriJCasadioM, et al. Robot-assisted training of the kinesthetic sense: enhancing proprioception after stroke. Front Hum Neurosci2014; 8: 1037.
50.
PinzonDVegaRSanchezYP, et al. Skill learning from kinesthetic feedback. Am J Surg2017; 214(4): 721–725.
51.
SrinivasanMCutkoskyMHoweR, et al. Human and machine haptics. RLE Prog Rep1999; 147: 1–39.
52.
VåpenstadCHofstadEFLangøT, et al. Perceiving haptic feedback in virtual reality simulators. Surg Endosc2013; 27: 2391–2397.
53.
LiebermanJI.Accelerated and improved motor learning and rehabilitation using kinesthetic feedback. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2006.
54.
WagnerEA.Using a kinesthetic learning strategy to engage nursing student thinking, enhance retention, and improve critical thinking. J Nurs Educ2014; 53(6): 348–351.
55.
IsrarASchwemlerZMarsJ, et al. Vr360hd: a vr360 player with enhanced haptic feedback. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACM conference on virtual reality software and technology, 2016, pp.183–186.
56.
RantalaJRaisamoRLylykangasJ, et al. Methods for presenting braille characters on a mobile device with a touchscreen and tactile feedback. IEEE Trans Haptics2009; 2(1): 28–39.
57.
PawlukDTAdamsRJKitadaR.Designing haptic assistive technology for individuals who are blind or visually impaired. IEEE Trans Haptics2015; 8(3): 258–278.
58.
Stephens-FrippBAliciGMutluR.A review of non-invasive sensory feedback methods for transradial prosthetic hands. IEEE Access2018; 6: 6878–6899.
59.
SensingerJWDosenS.A review of sensory feedback in upper-limb prostheses from the perspective of human motor control. Front Neurosci2020; 14: 345.
60.
SanfilippoFBlazauskasTSalviettiG, et al. A perspective review on integrating vr/ar with haptics into stem education for multi-sensory learning. Robotics2022; 11(2): 41.
61.
BermejoCHuiP.A survey on haptic technologies for mobile augmented reality. ACM Comput Surv2022; 54(9): 1–35.
62.
DoumanisIEconomouDSimGR, et al. The impact of multimodal collaborative virtual environments on learning: a gamified online debate. Comput Educ2019; 130: 121–138.
63.
CrossJBoag-HodgsonCRyleyT, et al. Using extended reality in flight simulators: a literature review. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph2023; 29(9): 3961–3975.
64.
EstradaEYuWLiX.Stable bilateral teleoperation with phase transition and haptic feedback. J Franklin Inst2021; 358(3): 1940–1956.
65.
HamamAEidMEl SaddikA.Effect of kinesthetic and tactile haptic feedback on the quality of experience of edutainment applications. Multimed Tools Appl2013; 67: 455–472.
66.
YunGMunMLeeJ, et al. Generating real-time, selective, and multimodal haptic effects from sound for gaming experience enhancement. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2023, pp.1–17.
67.
FreemanEWilsonGVoDB, et al. Multimodal feedback in hci: haptics, non-speech audio, and their applications. In: The Handbook of multimodal-multisensor interfaces: foundations, user modeling, and common modality combinations-volume 1, 2017, pp.277–317. ACM.
68.
TavakoliMAziminejadAPatelRV, et al. High-fidelity bilateral teleoperation systems and the effect of multimodal haptics. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern B2007; 37(6): 1512–1528.
69.
KajimotoH.Electro-tactile display: principle and hardware. In: Pervasive haptics: science, design, and application. 2016, pp.79–96. Springer Japan.
PeerA.Design and control of admittance-type telemanipulation systems. PhD Thesis, Citeseer, 2008.
72.
LiGLiQYangC, et al. The classification and new trends of shared control strategies in telerobotic systems: a survey. IEEE Trans Haptics2023; 16(2): 118–133.
73.
McNeelyWA. Robotic graphics: a new approach to force feedback for virtual reality. In: Proceedings of IEEE virtual reality annual international symposium, 1993, pp.336–341. IEEE.
74.
Ríos-HernándezMJacinto-VillegasJMPortillo-RodríguezO, et al. User-centered design and evaluation of an upper limb rehabilitation system with a virtual environment. Appl Sci2021; 11(20): 9500.
75.
OquendoYACoadMMWrenSM, et al. Haptic guidance and haptic error amplification in a virtual surgical robotic training environment. IEEE Trans Haptics2024; 17: 417–428.
76.
OmisoreOMHanSAl-HandarishY, et al. Motion and trajectory constraints control modeling for flexible surgical robotic systems. Micromachines2020; 11(4): 386.
77.
SeymourNEGallagherAGRomanSA, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg2002; 236(4): 458–463.
78.
Van SickleKRGallagherAGSmithCD.The effect of escalating feedback on the acquisition of psychomotor skills for laparoscopy. Surg Endosc2007; 21: 220–224.
79.
van der MeijdenOASchijvenMP. The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc2009; 23: 1180–1190.
80.
BetheaBTOkamuraAMKitagawaM, et al. Application of haptic feedback to robotic surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech2004; 14(3): 191–195.
81.
AggarwalRMyttonOTDerbrewM, et al. Training and simulation for patient safety. Qual Saf Health Care2010; 19(2): i34–i43.
82.
AlakerMWynnGRArulampalamT.Virtual reality training in laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review & meta-analysis. Int J Surg2016; 29: 85–94.
83.
RosserJCLynchPJCuddihyL, et al. The impact of video games on training surgeons in the 21st century. Arch Surg2007; 142(2): 181–186.
84.
GallagherAGLedermanABMcGladeK, et al. Discriminative validity of the minimally invasive surgical trainer in virtual reality (mist-vr) using criteria levels based on expert performance. Surg Endosc2004; 18: 660–665.
85.
AyodejiIDSchijvenMJakimowiczJ, et al. Face validation of the simbionix lap mentor virtual reality training module and its applicability in the surgical curriculum. Surg Endosc2007; 21: 1641–1649.
86.
PalterVNGrantcharovTP.Development and validation of a comprehensive curriculum to teach an advanced minimally invasive procedure: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg2012; 256(1): 25–32.
87.
SedlackRE.The mayo colonoscopy skills assessment tool: validation of a unique instrument to assess colonoscopy skills in trainees. Gastrointest Endosc2010; 72(6): 1125–1133, 1133.e1–1133.e3.
88.
KesavadasTKumarASrimathveeravalliG, et al. Efficacy of robotic surgery simulator (ross) for the Davinci® surgical system. J Urol2009; 181(4S): 823–823.
89.
CorvettoMAFuentesCAranedaA, et al. Validation of the imperial college surgical assessment device for spinal anesthesia. BMC Anesthesiol2017; 17: 131–137.
90.
DelormeSLarocheDDiRaddoR, et al. Neurotouch: a physics-based virtual simulator for cranial microneurosurgery training. Oper Neurosurg2012; 71: ons32–ons42.
91.
BerrondoCCanalichioKLLendvayTS.Education and simulation in minimally invasive surgery. In: Minimally invasive and robotic-assisted surgery in Pediatric Urology. 2020, pp.419–436. Springer International Publishing.
92.
DolmansVESchoutBMde BeerNA, et al. The virtual reality endourologic simulator is realistic and useful for educational purposes. J Endourol2009; 23(7): 1175–1181.
93.
YangLLiYLiuJ, et al. Effect of vascular simulation training on practice performance in residents: a retrospective cohort study. BMJ Open2020; 10(9): e037338.
94.
SorensenMSMosegaardJTrierP.The visible ear simulator: a public pc application for gpu-accelerated haptic 3d simulation of ear surgery based on the visible ear data. Otol Neurotol2009; 30(4): 484–487.
95.
SugandKMawkinMGupteC.Validating touch surgery™: a cognitive task simulation and rehearsal app for intramedullary femoral nailing. Injury2015; 46(11): 2212–2216.
96.
BaronchelliFZucchellaCSerraoM, et al. The effect of robotic assisted gait training with lokomat® on balance control after stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Neurol2021; 12: 661815.
97.
KrebsHIPalazzoloJJDipietroL, et al. Rehabilitation robotics: performance-based progressive robot-assisted therapy. Auton Robots2003; 15: 7–20.
98.
ButlerAJBayCWuD.Expanding tele-rehabilitation of stroke through in-home robot-assisted therapy. Int J Phys Med Rehabil2013; 2: 1–11.
99.
ChristensenKBRindomHKJensenDR, et al. Evaluation of the implementation of Armeo® spring in a specialized neurorehabilitation center. In: 2022 international conference on rehabilitation robotics (ICORR), 2022, pp.1–5. IEEE.
100.
TakebayashiTTakahashiKAmanoS, et al. Assessment of the efficacy of reogo-j robotic training against other rehabilitation therapies for upper-limb hemiplegia after stroke: protocol for a randomized controlled trial. Front Neurol2018; 9: 730.
101.
ZhouJMalricFShirmohammadiS.Practical calibration for upper extremity patients in haptic rehabilitation. In: 2009 IEEE international workshop on medical measurements and applications, 2009, pp.73–78. IEEE.
102.
AfzalMRByunHYOhMK, et al. Effects of kinesthetic haptic feedback on standing stability of young healthy subjects and stroke patients. J Neuroeng Rehabil2015; 12: 27.
103.
GironeMBurdeaGBouzitM, et al. Orthopedic rehabilitation using the “rutgers ankle” interface. In: Medicine meets Virtual Reality 2000. Studies in Health Technology and Informatics. 2000; pp.89–95.
104.
KalronAFonkatzIFridL, et al. The effect of balance training on postural control in people with multiple sclerosis using the caren virtual reality system: a pilot randomized controlled trial. J Neuroeng Rehabil2016; 13: 13.
105.
AhmedNMauadVAQGomez-RojasO, et al. The impact of rehabilitation-oriented virtual reality device in patients with ischemic stroke in the early subacute recovery phase: study protocol for a phase iii, single-blinded, randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Central Nervous Syst Dis2020; 12: 1179573519899471.
106.
TruijenSAbdullahiABijsterboschD, et al. Effect of home-based virtual reality training and telerehabilitation on balance in individuals with Parkinson disease, multiple sclerosis, and stroke: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Neurol Sci2022; 43(5): 2995–3006.
107.
BabaiaslMMahdiounSHJaryaniP, et al. A review of technological and clinical aspects of robot-aided rehabilitation of upper-extremity after stroke. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2016; 11(4): 263–280.
108.
RosenbergLB. Virtual haptic overlays enhance performance in telepresence tasks. In: Telemanipulator and telepresence technologies, December1995, vol. 2351, pp.99–108. SPIE.
109.
OrozcoMSilvaJEl SaddikA, et al. The role of haptics in games. In: SaddikA El (ed.) Haptics rendering and applications. 2012; pp.217–234. InTech
110.
CuiDMousasC.Evaluating wearable tactile feedback patterns during a virtual reality fighting game. In: 2021 IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality adjunct (ISMAR-Adjunct), 2021, pp.328–333. IEEE.
111.
LiconaARLiuFPinzonD, et al. Applications of haptics in medicine. In: Haptic interfaces for accessibility, health, and enhanced quality of life. 2020; pp.183–214. Springer.
112.
PantelidisPChortiAPapagiouvanniI, et al. Virtual and augmented reality in medical education. Front Virtual Real2018; 26(1): 77–97.
113.
KangNLeeS. A meta-analysis of recent studies on haptic feedback enhancement in immersive-augmented reality. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on virtual reality, 2018, pp.3–9.
114.
BhatiaAHornbækKSeifiH.Augmenting the feel of real objects: an analysis of haptic augmented reality. Int J Hum Stud2024; 185: 103244.
115.
YinJHinchetRSheaH, et al. Wearable soft technologies for haptic sensing and feedback. Adv Funct Mater2021; 31(39): 2007428.
116.
FangHGuoJWuH.Wearable triboelectric devices for haptic perception and VR/AR applications. Nano Energy2022; 96: 107112.
117.
WangPBaiXBillinghurstM, et al. AR/MR remote collaboration on physical tasks: a review. Robot Comput Manuf2021; 72: 102071.
118.
RheeTThompsonSMedeirosD, et al. Augmented virtual teleportation for high-fidelity telecollaboration. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph2020; 26(5): 1923–1933.
119.
BeeseNO.The virtual experience-examining visual, auditory and haptic capabilities and aspects of spatial cognition and user experience in virutal reality. PhD Thesis, Rheinland-Pfälzische Technische Universität Kaiserslautern-Landau, 2024.
120.
MachadoFLoureiroMMelloRC, et al. A novel mixed reality assistive system to aid the visually and mobility impaired using a multimodal feedback system. Displays2023; 79: 102480.
121.
MassieTHSalisburyJK. The phantom haptic interface: a device for probing virtual objects. In: Proceedings of the ASME winter annual meeting, symposium on haptic interfaces for virtual environment and teleoperator systems, Chicago, IL, USA, 1994, vol. 55, pp.295–300.
122.
PooryousefVBrownRTurkayS. Shape recognition and selection in medical volume visualisation with haptic gloves. In: Proceedings of the 31st Australian conference on human-computer-interaction, 2019, pp.433–436.
123.
ShorDZaaijerBAhsmannL, et al. Designing haptics: improving a virtual reality glove with respect to realism, performance, and comfort. Int J Autom Technol2019; 13(4): 453–463.
124.
JadhavSKannandaVKangB, et al. Soft robotic glove for kinesthetic haptic feedback in virtual reality environments. Electron Imaging2017; 29: 19–24.
125.
LiMZhuoYChenJ, et al. Design and performance characterization of a soft robot hand with fingertip haptic feedback for teleoperation. Adv Robot2020; 34(23): 1491–1505.
126.
LiuSHYuNHChanL, et al. Phantomlegs: reducing virtual reality sickness using head-worn haptic devices. In: 2019 IEEE conference on virtual reality and 3D user interfaces (VR), 2019, pp.817–826. IEEE.
127.
ZhangLHeWCaoZ, et al. Hapticproxy: providing positional vibrotactile feedback on a physical proxy for virtual-real interaction in augmented reality. Int J Hum Interact2023; 39(3): 449–463.
128.
Braga RodriguesTÓ CatháinCO’ConnorNE, et al. A quality of experience assessment of haptic and augmented reality feedback modalities in a gait analysis system. PLoS One2020; 15(3): e0230570.
129.
EnayatiNDe MomiEFerrignoG.Haptics in robot-assisted surgery: challenges and benefits. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng2016; 9: 49–65.
130.
Di CastroM. A novel robotic framework for safe inspection and telemanipulation in hazardous and unstructured environments. PhD Thesis, Industriales, 2019.
131.
de BarrosPGLindemanRW. Performance effects of multi-sensory displays in virtual teleoperation environments. In: Proceedings of the 1st symposium on spatial user interaction, 2013, pp.41–48.
132.
RastogiNKumar SrivastavaA.Control system design for tokamak remote maintenance operations using assisted virtual reality and haptic feedback. Fusion Eng Des2019; 139: 47–54.
133.
BasdoganCDeSKimJ, et al. Haptics in minimally invasive surgical simulation and training. IEEE Comput Graph Appl2004; 24(2): 56–64.
134.
KhanAAnwarY.Robots in healthcare: a survey. In: Advances in computer vision: proceedings of the 2019 computer vision conference (CVC), volume 2 1, 2019, pp.280–292. Springer.
135.
BolopionARegnierS.A review of haptic feedback teleoperation systems for micromanipulation and microassembly. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng2013; 10(3): 496–502.
136.
HammondFLKramerRKWanQ, et al. Soft tactile sensor arrays for force feedback in micromanipulation. IEEE Sens J2014; 14(5): 1443–1452.
137.
ZhangBXieYZhouJ, et al. State-of-the-art robotic grippers, grasping and control strategies, as well as their applications in agricultural robots: a review. Comput Electron Agric2020; 177: 105694.
138.
WangCLiFWangY, et al. Haptic assistive control with learning-based driver intent recognition for semi-autonomous vehicles. IEEE Trans Intell Vehicles2023; 8(1): 425–437.
139.
ChisholmKJKlumperKMullinsA, et al. A task oriented haptic gait rehabilitation robot. Mechatronics2014; 24(8): 1083–1091.
140.
StramigioliSMahonyRCorkeP.A novel approach to haptic tele-operation of aerial robot vehicles. In: 2010 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2010, pp.5302–5308. IEEE.
141.
HuangBWangZChengQ, et al. Aerohaptix: a wearable vibrotactile feedback system for enhancing collision avoidance in UAV teleoperation. arXiv preprint arXiv:240712105. 2024.
142.
WuYMaYZhengH, et al. Piezoelectric materials for flexible and wearable electronics: a review. Mater Des2021; 211: 110164.
143.
YuNHChanLWLauSY, et al. Tuic: enabling tangible interaction on capacitive multi-touch displays. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2011, pp.2995–3004.
144.
PacchierottiCSinclairSSolazziM, et al. Wearable haptic systems for the fingertip and the hand: taxonomy, review, and perspectives. IEEE Trans Haptics2017; 10(4): 580–600.
145.
SeneviratneSHuYNguyenT, et al. A survey of wearable devices and challenges. IEEE Commun Surv Tutor2017; 19(4): 2573–2620.
146.
ChuMCuiZZhangA, et al. Multisensory fusion, haptic, and visual feedback teleoperation system under iot framework. IEEE Internet Things J2022; 9(20): 19717–19727.
147.
CostesADanieauFArgelaguetF, et al. Towards haptic images: a survey on touchscreen-based surface haptics. IEEE Trans Haptics2020; 13(3): 530–541.
148.
MaYLiHChenS, et al. Skin-like electronics for perception and interaction: materials, structural designs, and applications. Adv Intell Syst2021; 3(4): 2000108.
149.
ChenSChenYYangJ, et al. Skin-integrated stretchable actuators toward skin-compatible haptic feedback and closed-loop human-machine interactions. npj Flexible Electronics2023; 7(1): 1.
150.
MathesonEMintoRZampieriEG, et al. Human–robot collaboration in manufacturing applications: a review. Robotics2019; 8(4): 100.
151.
XiaP.Haptics for product design and manufacturing simulation. IEEE Trans Haptics2016; 9(3): 358–375.
152.
ShankhwarKChuangTJTsaiYY, et al. A visuo-haptic extended reality–based training system for hands-on manual metal arc welding training. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2022; 121(1–2): 249–265.
153.
LeporaNFWard-CherrierB.Tactile quality control with biomimetic active touch. IEEE Robot Autom Lett2016; 1(2): 646–652.
154.
BogueR.Tactile sensing for surgical and collaborative robots and robotic grippers. Ind Robot Int J Robot Res Appl2019; 46(1): 1–6.
155.
SuYPChenXQZhouC, et al. Integrating virtual, mixed, and augmented reality into remote robotic applications: A brief review of extended reality-enhanced robotic systems for intuitive telemanipulation and telemanufacturing tasks in hazardous conditions. Appl Sci2023; 13(22): 12129.
156.
XiaP.VR-haptic sensory augmentation and body motion control for subsea robot teleoperation. PhD Thesis, University of Florida, 2024.
157.
Contreras MasseR. Application of IOT with haptics interface in the smart manufacturing industry. Instituto de Ingeniería y Tecnología2018; 10(2): 57–70.
158.
RadiMReinhartG.Industrial haptic robot guidance system for assembly processes. In: 2009 IEEE international workshop on haptic audio visual environments and games, 2009, pp.69–74. IEEE.
159.
WiebeENMinogueJGail JonesM, et al. Haptic feedback and students’ learning about levers: unraveling the effect of simulated touch. Comput Educ2009; 53(3): 667–676.
160.
LontscharSDeeganDHumerI, et al. Analysis of haptic feedback and its influences in virtual reality learning environments. In: 2020 6th international conference of the immersive learning research network (iLRN), 2020, pp.171–177. IEEE.
161.
Escobar-CastillejosDNoguezJNeriL, et al. A review of simulators with haptic devices for medical training. J Med Syst2016; 40: 104–122.
162.
KapoorSAroraPKapoorV, et al. Haptics - touchfeedback technology widening the horizon of medicine. J Clin Diagn Res2014; 8(3): 294–299.
163.
SorginiFCaliòRCarrozzaMC, et al. Haptic-assistive technologies for audition and vision sensory disabilities. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2018; 13(4): 394–421.
164.
KuberRYuWMcAllisterG. Towards developing assistive haptic feedback for visually impaired internet users. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2007, pp.1525–1534.
165.
TrivediUAlqasemiRDubeyR. Wearable musical haptic sleeves for people with hearing impairment. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM international conference on pervasive technologies related to assistive environments, 2019, pp.146–151.
166.
SvenssonPWijkUBjörkmanA, et al. A review of invasive and non-invasive sensory feedback in upper limb prostheses. Expert Rev Med Devices2017; 14(6): 439–447.
167.
YunusRAliSAyazY, et al. Development and testing of a wearable vibrotactile haptic feedback system for proprioceptive rehabilitation. IEEE Access2020; 8: 35172–35184.
168.
KbarGBhatiaAAbidiMH, et al. Assistive technologies for hearing, and speaking impaired people: a survey. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol2017; 12(1): 3–20.
169.
BortoneILeonardisDMastronicolaN, et al. Wearable haptics and immersive virtual reality rehabilitation training in children with neuromotor impairments. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2018; 26(7): 1469–1478.
170.
KuznetsovSDeyAKHudsonSE. The effectiveness of haptic cues as an assistive technology for human memory. In: Pervasive computing: 7th international conference, pervasive 2009. Proceedings 7, Nara, Japan, 11–14 May 2009, pp.168–175. Springer.
171.
Marchal-CrespoLMcHughenSCramerSC, et al. The effect of haptic guidance, aging, and initial skill level on motor learning of a steering task. Exp Brain Res2010; 201: 209–220.
172.
D’AurizioNBaldiTLPaolocciG, et al. Preventing undesired face-touches with wearable devices and haptic feedback. IEEE Access2020; 8: 139033–139043.
173.
OziokoODahiyaR.Smart tactile gloves for haptic interaction, communication, and rehabilitation. Adv Intell Syst2022; 4(2): 2100091.
174.
Saint-LouisCHamamA.Survey of haptic technology and entertainment applications. In: SoutheastCon 2021, 2020, pp.01–07. IEEE.
175.
McDanielTKrishnaSBalasubramanianV, et al. Using a haptic belt to convey non-verbal communication cues during social interactions to individuals who are blind. In: 2008 IEEE international workshop on haptic audio visual environments and games, 2008, pp.13–18. IEEE.
176.
TapuRMocanuBZahariaT.Wearable assistive devices for visually impaired: a state of the art survey. Pattern Recognit Lett2020; 137: 37–52.
177.
BreletLGaffaryY.Stress reduction interventions: a scoping review to explore progress toward use of haptic feedback in virtual reality. Front Virtual Real2022; 3: 900970.
178.
McDanielTPanchanathanS. Therapeutic haptics for mental health and wellbeing. In: Haptic interfaces for accessibility, health, and enhanced quality of life. 2019, pp.149–181.
179.
LindCMDiaz-OlivaresJALindecrantzK, et al. A wearable sensor system for physical ergonomics interventions using haptic feedback. Sensors2020; 20(21): 6010.
180.
ShullPBDamianDD.Haptic wearables as sensory replacement, sensory augmentation and trainer – a review. J Neuroeng Rehabil2015; 12(1): 13.
181.
TsaiCYTsaiILLaiCJ, et al. Airracket: perceptual design of ungrounded, directional force feedback to improve virtual racket sports experiences. In: Proceedings of the 2022 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2022, pp.1–15.
182.
ChenDKChossatJBShullPB.Haptivec: presenting haptic feedback vectors in handheld controllers using embedded tactile pin arrays. In: Proceedings of the 2019 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2019, pp.1–11.
183.
BurdeaGCLinMCRibarskyW, et al. Guest editorial: special issue on haptics, virtual, and augmented reality. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph2005; 11(6): 611–613.
184.
MartinSHillierN. Characterisation of the novint falcon haptic device for application as a robot manipulator. In: Australasian conference on robotics and automation (ACRA), 2009, pp.291–292. Citeseer.
185.
AipleMSchieleA.Pushing the limits of the cybergrasp™ for haptic rendering. In: 2013 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2013, pp.3541–3546. IEEE.
186.
PerretJVander PoortenE.Touching virtual reality: a review of haptic gloves. In: ACTUATOR 2018; 16th international conference on new actuators, 2018, pp.1–5. VDE.
187.
ZhangXZhangWSunW, et al. A high-fidelity virtual liver model incorporating biological characteristics. Heliyon2023; 9(12): e22978.
188.
CastiçoACardosoP.Usability tests for texture comparison in an electroadhesion-based haptic device. Multimodal Technol Interact2022; 6(12): 108.
189.
ChenXGongLWeiL, et al. A wearable hand rehabilitation system with soft gloves. IEEE Trans Ind Inform2021; 17(2): 943–952.
190.
AlZhraniGAlotaibiFAzarnoushH, et al. Proficiency performance benchmarks for removal of simulated brain tumors using a virtual reality simulator neurotouch. J Surg Educ2015; 72(4): 685–696.
191.
AndrychowiczOMBakerBChociejM, et al. Learning dexterous in-hand manipulation. Int J Rob Res2020; 39(1): 3–20.
192.
TangYLiuSDengY, et al. Construction of force haptic reappearance system based on geomagic touch haptic device. Comput Methods Programs Biomed2020; 190: 105344.
193.
PetermeijerSMde WinterJCFBenglerKJ.Vibrotactile displays: a survey with a view on highly automated driving. IEEE Trans Intell Transp Syst2016; 17(4): 897–907.
194.
PittsMJBurnettGSkrypchukL, et al. Visual–haptic feedback interaction in automotive touchscreens. Displays2012; 33(1): 7–16.
195.
LinLZhouJZhongZ.Soft magnetoelastic tactile multi-sensors with energy-absorbing properties for self-powered human–machine interfaces. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces2024; 16: 51521–51531.
196.
ZhouYZhaoXXuJ, et al. A multimodal magnetoelastic artificial skin for underwater haptic sensing. Sci Adv2024; 10(1): eadj8567.
197.
KimMJeonCKimJ.A study on immersion and presence of a portable hand haptic system for immersive virtual reality. Sensors2017; 17(5): 1141.
198.
LinYWangXWuF, et al. Development and validation of a surgical training simulator with haptic feedback for learning bone-sawing skill. J Biomed Inform2014; 48: 122–129.
199.
GuXZhangYSunW, et al. Dexmo: an inexpensive and lightweight mechanical exoskeleton for motion capture and force feedback in VR. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2016, pp.1991–1995.
200.
Palacios-IbáñezAAlonso-GarcíaMConteroM, et al. The influence of hand tracking and haptic feedback for virtual prototype evaluation in the product design process. J Mech Des2023; 145(4): 041403.
201.
CarterTSeahSALongB, et al. Ultrahaptics: multi-point mid-air haptic feedback for touch surfaces. In: Proceedings of the 26th annual ACM symposium on user interface software and technology, 2013, pp.505–514.
202.
GeorgiouOFrierWFreemanE, et al. Ultrasound mid-air haptics for touchless interfaces. Springer, 2022.
BellaniPCarulliMCarusoG. Gestural interfaces to support the sketching activities of designers. In: International design engineering technical conferences and computers and information in engineering conference, 2021, volume 85376, p.V002T02A074. American Society of Mechanical Engineers.
205.
JungYHKimJRogersJA.Skin-integrated vibrohaptic interfaces for virtual and augmented reality. Adv Funct Mater2021; 31(39): 2008805.
LiuLMiyakeSMaruyamaN, et al. Development of two-handed multi-finger haptic interface spidar-10. In: Haptics: neuroscience, devices, modeling, and applications: 9th international conference, EuroHaptics 2014, proceedings, part II 9, Versailles, France, 24–26 June 2014, pp.176–183. Springer.
208.
ChinelloFPacchierottiCBimboJ, et al. Design and evaluation of a wearable skin stretch device for haptic guidance. IEEE Robot Autom Lett2018; 3(1): 524–531.
209.
AdilkhanovARubagottiMKappassovZ.Haptic devices: wearability-based taxonomy and literature review. IEEE Access2022; 10: 91923–91947.
210.
SunRCarreiraSCChenY, et al. Stretchable piezoelectric sensing systems for self-powered and wireless health monitoring. Adv Mater Technol2019; 4(5): 1900100.
211.
WangYWangJLiY, et al. The deep reinforcement learning-based VR training system with haptic guidance for catheterization skill transfer. IEEE Sens J2022; 22(23): 23356–23366.
212.
ShihMLChenYCTungCY, et al. Dlwv2: a deep learning-based wearable vision-system with vibrotactile-feedback for visually impaired people to reach objects. In: 2018 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2018, pp.1–9. IEEE.
213.
ParkSBKimBH.Design of cnn-based braille conversion and voice output device for the blind. JKIOTS2023; 9(3): 87–92.
214.
MinopoulosGMMemosVAStergiouKD, et al. A medical image visualization technique assisted with AI-based haptic feedback for robotic surgery and healthcare. Appl Sci2023; 13(6): 3592.
215.
RouhafzayGCretuAMPayeurP.Transfer of learning from vision to touch: a hybrid deep convolutional neural network for visuo-tactile 3d object recognition. Sensors2020; 21(1): 113.
216.
FekriPDargahiJZadehM.Deep learning-based haptic guidance for surgical skills transfer. Front Rob AI2021; 7: 586707.
217.
JoshiDCKumarPJoshiRC, et al. Ai-enhanced analysis to investigate the feasibility of emg signals for prosthetic hand force control incorporating anthropometric measures. Prosthestics2024; 6(6): 1459–1478.
MaoRQLanLKayJ, et al. Immersive virtual reality for surgical training: a systematic review. J Surg Res2021; 268: 40–58.
220.
ButtALKardong-EdgrenSEllertsonA.Using game-based virtual reality with haptics for skill acquisition. Clin Simul Nurs2018; 16: 25–32.
221.
SimDBaekYChoM, et al. Low-latency haptic open glove for immersive virtual reality interaction. Sensors2021; 21(11): 3682.
222.
ZhuMSunZZhangZ, et al. Haptic-feedback smart glove as a creative human-machine interface (hmi) for virtual/augmented reality applications. Sci Adv2020; 6(19): eaaz8693.
223.
WuZ.Enhanced AR: integrating haptic feedback from tactile sensors for immersive teleoperation. Master’s Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 2024.
224.
KrumpenSKleinRWeinmannM.Towards tangible cultural heritage experiences—enriching vr-based object inspection with haptic feedback. J Comput Cult Herit2022; 15(1): 1–17.
225.
ArbeláezJCViganòROsorio-GómezG.Haptic augmented reality (hapticar) for assembly guidance. Int J Interact Des Manuf2019; 13: 673–687.
226.
HuppertFHoelzlGKranzM.Guidecopter-a precise drone-based haptic guidance interface for blind or visually impaired people. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2021, pp.1–14.
227.
RomanoJMKuchenbeckerKJ.Creating realistic virtual textures from contact acceleration data. IEEE Trans Haptics2012; 5(2): 109–119.
228.
KoGRyuSNamS, et al. Design of virtual reality prototyping system and hand-held haptic controller. Int J Comput Theory Eng2019; 11(4): 72–75.
229.
EdwardsBIBielawskiKSPradaR, et al. Haptic virtual reality and immersive learning for enhanced organic chemistry instruction. Virtual Real2019; 23(4): 363–373.
230.
HanPHChenYSLeeKC, et al. Haptic around: multiple tactile sensations for immersive environment and interaction in virtual reality. In: Proceedings of the 24th ACM symposium on virtual reality software and technology, 2018, pp.1–10.
231.
RajasekaranV.Adaptive control for wearable robots in human-centered rehabilitation tasks. PhD Thesis, Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya, 2015.
232.
EfthimiouEFotineaSEVacalopoulouA, et al. User centered design in practice: adapting HRI to real user needs. In: Proceedings of the 12th ACM international conference on PErvasive technologies related to assistive environments, 2019, pp.425–429.
233.
PreuscheCHirzingerG.Haptics in telerobotics: current and future research and applications. Vis Comput2007; 23: 273–284.
234.
NiL.Position-error-based force-reflecting teleoperation. National Library of Canada, 2004.
235.
CorreaMCárdenasDCarvajalD, et al. Haptic teleoperation of impact hammers in underground mining. Appl Sci2022; 12(3): 1428.
236.
KamijoTBeltran-HernandezCCHamayaM.Learning variable compliance control from a few demonstrations for bimanual robot with haptic feedback teleoperation system. In: 2024 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2024, pp.12663–12670. IEEE.
237.
LinW.Deep reinforcement learning based haptic enhancement for tele-diagnosis. In: 2022 IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE), 2022, pp.1–8. IEEE.
238.
RyuDHwangCSKangS, et al. Wearable haptic-based multi-modal teleoperation of field mobile manipulator for explosive ordnance disposal. In: IEEE international safety, security and rescue robotics, workshop, 2005, 2005, pp.75–80. IEEE.
239.
Abi-FarrajlFHenzeBWernerA, et al. Humanoid teleoperation using task-relevant haptic feedback. In: 2018 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), 2018, pp.5010–5017. IEEE.
240.
ColesTRJohnNWGouldD, et al. Integrating haptics with augmented reality in a femoral palpation and needle insertion training simulation. IEEE Trans Haptics2011; 4(3): 199–209.
241.
CrespoLMReinkensmeyerDJ.Haptic guidance can enhance motor learning of a steering task. J Mot Behav2008; 40(6): 545–556.
242.
KoschTKarolusJZagermannJ, et al. A survey on measuring cognitive workload in human-computer interaction. ACM Comput Surv2023; 55(13s): 1–39.
243.
YoungGWKehoeAMurphyD. Usability testing of video game controllers. In: Garcia-RuizMA (ed.) Games user research: a case study approach. Taylor & Francis, 2016, pp.145–188.
244.
GunnCHutchinsMAdcockM.Combating latency in haptic collaborative virtual environments. Presence2005; 14(3): 313–328.
245.
DeberJJotaRForlinesC, et al. How much faster is fast enough? User perception of latency & latency improvements in direct and indirect touch. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems. 2015, pp.1827–1836.
246.
KuhailMABerengueresJTaherF, et al. Challenges of designing haptic experiences. In: Advances, applications and the future of Haptic Technology. Springer Briefs in Computer Science, 2024, pp.43–53.
247.
KhakurelJPorrasJMelkasH, et al. A comprehensive framework of usability issues related to the wearable devices. In: PaivaSPaulS (eds.) Convergence of ICT and smart devices for emerging applications. EAI/Springer Innovations in Communication and Computing, 2020, pp.21–66.
248.
SoviakABorodinAAshokV, et al. Tactile accessibility: does anyone need a haptic glove? In: Proceedings of the 18th international ACM SIGACCESS conference on computers and accessibility. 2016, pp.101–109.
249.
Martinez-HernandezUMetcalfeBAssafT, et al. Wearable assistive robotics: a perspective on current challenges and future trends. Sensors2021; 21(20): 6751.
250.
PengYYangNXuQ, et al. Recent advances in flexible tactile sensors for intelligent systems. Sensors2021; 21(16): 5392.
251.
YaoKZhuangQZhangQ, et al. A fully integrated breathable haptic textile. Sci Adv2024; 10(42): eadq9575.
252.
JagatheesaperumalSKSathikumarPRajanH.Metadigihuman: haptic interfaces for digital humans in the metaverse. IT Prof2024; 26(6): 21–27.
253.
PatogluVLiYO’MalleyMK. On the efficacy of haptic guidance schemes for human motor learning. In: World congress on medical physics and biomedical engineering: vol. 25/9 Neuroengineering, Neural Systems, Rehabilitation and Prosthetics, Munich, Germany, 7–12 September 2009, pp.203–206. Springer.
254.
BjellandHVTangelandK. User-centered design proposals for prototyping haptic user interfaces. In: Haptic and audio interaction design: second international workshop, HAID 2007 proceedings 2, Seoul, South Korea, 29–30, November 2007, pp.110–120. Springer.
255.
PatersonM.On haptic media and the possibilities of a more inclusive interactivity. New Media Soc2017; 19(10): 1541–1562.
256.
De GuzmanJAThilakarathnaKSeneviratneA.Security and privacy approaches in mixed reality: a literature survey. ACM Comput Surv2020; 52(6): 1–37.
257.
ZhaoWDeborahDDReinthalMA, et al. Privacy-aware human motion tracking with realtime haptic feedback. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on mobile services, 2015, pp.446–453. IEEE.
258.
LeyMRambukkanaN.Touching at a distance: digital intimacies, haptic platforms, and the ethics of consent. Sci Eng Ethics2021; 27: 1–17.
259.
Al-SamarraieHMuthana SarsamSAlzahraniAI.Haptic technology in society: a sentiment analysis of public engagement. Comput Human Behav2023; 147: 107862.
260.
CaveJVan OranjeCSchindlerR, et al. Trends in connectivity technologies and their socio-economic impacts. DG Information Society and Media, 2009.
261.
CreedCAl-KalbaniMTheilA, et al. Inclusive ar/vr: accessibility barriers for immersive technologies. Univers Access Inf Soc2024; 23(1): 59–73.
262.
LokeshRRanganathanR.Haptic assistance that restricts the use of redundant solutions is detrimental to motor learning. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2020; 28(6): 1373–1380.
263.
RenQHouYBotteldoorenD, et al. Behavioural models of risk-taking in human-robot tactile interactions. Sensors2023; 23(10): 4786.
264.
LeeJKimMKimJ.A study on immersion and vr sickness in walking interaction for immersive virtual reality applications. Symmetry2017; 9(5): 78.
265.
BowmanJMComptonBL.Haptic interactions: connections between touch and emotion in relationships. In: ChadeeDKosticA (eds) Body Language Communication. Springer, 2025, pp.59–79.
266.
YehCHSuFCShanYS, et al. Application of piezoelectric actuator to simplified haptic feedback system. Sens Actuators A Phys2020; 303: 111820.
267.
ChenSJiangKLouZ, et al. Recent developments in graphene-based tactile sensors and E-Skins. Adv Mater Technol2018; 3(2): 1700248.
268.
MacLeanKE.Designing affective haptic experience for wellness and social communication: where designers need affective neuroscience and psychology. Curr Opin Behav Sci2022; 45: 101113.
269.
RizzoAAMcLaughlinMJungY, et al. Virtual therapeutic environments with haptics: an interdisciplinary approach for developing post-stroke rehabilitation systems. CPSN2005; 5: 70–76.
270.
PriceSLeder MackleyKJewittC, et al. Reshaping touch communication: an interdisciplinary research agenda. In: Extended abstracts of the 2018 CHI conference on human factors in computing systems, 2018, pp.1–8.
ChenZYLiYJWangM, et al. A reinforcement learning approach to redirected walking with passive haptic feedback. In: 2021 IEEE international symposium on mixed and augmented reality (ISMAR), 2021, pp.184–192. IEEE.
273.
StellaFHughesJ.The science of soft robot design: a review of motivations, methods and enabling technologies. Front Rob AI2022; 9: 1059026.
274.
SchneiderOMacLeanKSwindellsC, et al. Haptic experience design: what hapticians do and where they need help. Int J Hum Stud2017; 107: 5–21.
275.
JiangYHamadaniKNgK, et al. Developing scalable hands-on virtual and mixed-reality science labs. Virtual Real2024; 28(4): 173.
276.
ArtigasJBalachandranRRieckeC, et al. Kontur-2: force-feedback teleoperation from the international space station. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), 2016, pp.1166–1173. IEEE.
277.
KuhailMABerengueresJTaherF, et al. Haptic technology adoption and future trends. In: Advances, applications and the future of haptic technology. Springer Briefs in Computer Science, 2024, pp.55–74.
278.
StefanaEMarcianoFRossiD, et al. Wearable devices for ergonomics: a systematic literature review. Sensors2021; 21(3): 777.
279.
SigristRRauterGRienerR, et al. Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: a review. Psychon Bull Rev2013; 20(1): 21–53.
280.
BluteauJCoquillartSPayanY, et al. Haptic guidance improves the visuo-manual tracking of trajectories. PLoS One2008; 3(3): e1775.
281.
Marchal-CrespoLvan RaaiMRauterG, et al. The effect of haptic guidance and visual feedback on learning a complex tennis task. Exp Brain Res2013; 231(3): 277–291.
282.
EmkenJLReinkensmeyerDJ.Robot-enhanced motor learning: accelerating internal model formation during locomotion by transient dynamic amplification. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng2005; 13(1): 33–39.
283.
WeiYPattonJBajajP, et al. A real-time haptic/graphic demonstration of how error augmentation can enhance learning. In: Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2005, pp.4406–4411. IEEE.
