Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before
sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal
government site.
The
ensures that you are connecting to the
official website and that any information you provide is encrypted
and transmitted securely.
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with,
the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Auditory discomfort (16.5%) was also a common issue, with complaints centring around lack of quality sound mixing, causing trigger sounds to be too harsh. About 13% of comments also reported that the sound of the host’s voice being subjectively non-conducive to relaxation inhibited their ASMR.
Participants also complained that the video was ‘boring’ (4%) or ‘not relaxing’ (5%), with the following an example of the latter:
Distance from object
In order to better understand ideal camera angles for stimuli creation, participants were asked to rate the intensity of tingling sensations anticipated at a series of distances from an ASMR inducing activity. The sample (
N
= 127) rated smaller, more detailed actions, such as origami, to be best viewed from 60 cm or closer. Larger actions that can be better seen further away are best viewed from a distance of around 60 cm to 1 m away from the trigger object. Curiously, though potentially as small a visual stimulus as origami, the action of pouring liquid was rated as similarly effective up to a distance of 2 m from the trigger. These data are illustrated in
.
Visual aspects of trigger objects
When probed as to the factors which make an ASMR trigger object effective in online ASMR content (‘How important would the following factors be in triggering your ASMR?’), participants (
N
= 127) most strongly indicated that sounds made from the manipulation and use of objects was an important stimulus, with 51.2% of the sample rating it as ‘extremely important’. Visual aspects such as a focus on small details, the materials that trigger objects are made from, and symmetry receiving more mixed evaluations (see
). Interestingly, the colour of ASMR trigger objects was rated as mostly unimportant in inducing ASMR, with 53.5% rating this factor as ‘not at all important’.
Table 1
Responses to the question ‘How important would the following factors be in triggering your ASMR?’ (
N
= 127).
|
|
Extremely important (%)
|
Very important (%)
|
Moderately important (%)
|
Slightly important (%)
|
Not at all important (%)
|
|
Focus on small physical details
|
11
|
24.4
|
26.8
|
13.4
|
24.4
|
|
Focus on symmetry
|
7.1
|
14.2
|
24.4
|
15
|
39.4
|
|
The colour of the object
|
1.6
|
8.7
|
12.6
|
23.6
|
53.5
|
|
Focus on the material the object is made from
|
13.4
|
30.7
|
27.6
|
17.3
|
11
|
|
Sounds that the object would make if manipulated by the host
|
51.2
|
33.1
|
8.7
|
5.5
|
1.6
|
Provision of context
Participants (
N
= 127) were prompted with an ASMR video scenario: ‘Imagine [object] has special historical significance. It was the first of its kind, and seeing it in use is very rare’. They were then asked to rate the following statement on a 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree) Likert scale: ‘Knowing [the above information] would increase the effectiveness of [an object] as an ASMR trigger’. A total of 127 participants responded in a mixed manner, 22% strongly disagreeing, 11% disagreeing, 22% neither agreeing nor disagreeing, 23% agreeing, and 11% strongly agreeing.
Demonstration of trigger objects
In videos focusing on particular objects which are intended to trigger ASMR, hosts often manipulate the object without directly interacting with the viewer. In these cases, participants (
N
= 127) strongly favoured expert use of the object (
M
= 3.72, SD = 1.22) over a trial and error approach (
M
= 2.78, SD = 1.27) as shown by a two-tailed paired-samples
t
-test (
t
(124) = 6.71,
p
< 0.01).
Audio
About 77% of the sample (
N
= 126) agreed with the statement ‘The pitch of the [trigger] sounds affects how strongly I feel tingles’. Only 10% disagreed with this statement. Further questions exploring whether high or low pitches were preferred revealed that lower pitches were rated as more likely to produce an intense tingling sensation; 12% of the sample agreed that higher-pitched trigger sounds caused more intense tingles (56% disagreed), and 56% agreed that lower-pitched trigger sounds produced more intense tingles (11% disagreed).
Of those participants who responded to a section probing hardware preferences (
N
= 108), 84% reported regularly consuming binaurally recorded ASMR media (
Paul, 2009
). About 58% said they feel binaural recording is more effective than regularly recorded audio for ASMR media consumption, whereas 16% disagreed with this sentiment. Further questioning revealed that 61% of the participants felt that binaural recording made the associated tingling sensation more intense.
Participants (
N
= 126) rated the statement ‘I only get tingles from sounds made by objects shown on the screen’ on a scale of one (strongly disagree) to seven (strongly agree). The results were somewhat split, with 31% of the sample agreeing somewhat to strongly, 65% disagreeing somewhat to strongly, and 4% neither agreeing nor disagreeing with the statement. Responses in the ‘disagree’ category favoured disagree (33%) and strongly disagree (22%).
When asked to rate the statement ‘Background music adds to how effective ASMR videos are at inducing tingles’ on a one (strongly disagree) to seven (strongly agree) Likert scale, participants heavily favoured disagree options. Only 14% of 126 respondents agreed to any extent, 10% neither agreed nor disagreed, and 72% disagreed to some extent. Of these disagree responses, strongly disagree (37%) and disagree (22%) were favoured.
These participants also rated the statement ‘Background music inhibits me from feeling strong tingles’ on the same seven point scale. Results were complimentary—71% of the sample agreed to some extent (with the option of strongly agree—28%—and agree—21%—favoured).
Discussion
The results of the study provide a number of useful insights for those intending to create effective ASMR audio-visual stimuli for experimental use. Though responses both here and in other research (
Barratt & Davis, 2015
) make clear there is wide variety in effective stimuli between individuals, there appear to be several common threads in non-interpersonal ASMR trigger and viewing preferences. It is to be hoped that these results will be used to create lab and media content that is effective for the widest possible audience.
Previous research (
Barratt & Davis, 2015
) suggests that ASMR is a flow-like state (
Csikszentmihalyi, 1979
). As such, this study included some questions to probe whether or not participants identified their favourite ASMR content as having flow-like qualities which may aid the induction of such a state, and whether or not these qualities were universally required in order for content to be effective. The finding that participants prefer content that is happy, inviting, relaxed, and lacks danger, suggests that popular ASMR videos centring around the manipulation of objects may induce a flow-like state in viewers by depicting an environment that is conducive to flow. When viewed alongside consistent reports of obvious scripting resulting in ASMR videos being ineffective, and the strong preference for expert usage and manipulation of trigger objects over trial and error, this seems to suggest that participants are able to initiate their own experience of flow through viewing the effortless, automatic flow of movement that is associated with the state.
This idea of overall atmosphere being vital to ASMR induction is also supported by a large majority of participants choosing to skip those sections related to imagining achieving ASMR in a bar setting. This absence of response suggests that this type of environment, revealed in spontaneous reports from participants to be imagined as too loud, too public, and too chaotic, is extremely non-conducive to ASMR. These qualities stand in opposition to those associated with flow state, which may be why they are rated as undesirable when looking to achieve ASMR.
However, the participants did not rate their favourite ASMR content as predictable—this in itself may be evidence that this type of content does not necessarily need to depict all aspects of flow state in order to be effective, but rather to be pleasant and inviting enough to allow for relaxation. Further investigation is required in order to establish whether viewers take on a flow-like state from immersing themselves in the video, as one might expect through a sort of rubber-hand effect (
Botvinick & Cohen, 1998
;
Ehrsson, Spence & Passingham, 2004
), or rather find them relaxing enough to achieve that state independently of taking on depicted flow states.
The findings of the present study suggest a number of considerations for factors to control when creating ASMR inducing lab stimuli. Previous research (
Barratt & Davis, 2015
) indicates that ‘crisp’ sounds, such as the crinkling of tinfoil, are effective non-interpersonal ASMR triggers. However, viewed in isolation, this may paint a misrepresentative image of the types of sounds that are, in fact, capable of inducing ASMR. In particular, the results of the current study suggest that trigger sounds having a lower pitch are more frequently associated with intense ASMR sensations. Those sounds that are more complex, such as resonating tones, may also be especially appealing to viewers, as suggested by qualitative feedback.
Questions investigating physical attributes of triggers highlighted the fact that viewing small physical details of trigger objects, and exploring the material the trigger object is made of is somewhat important to the ASMR experience for the majority of respondents (see Visual aspects of trigger objects, above). Aspects such as colour and symmetry were less important to the induction of ASMR sensations. Participants responded most favourably, however, to the importance of sounds made by trigger objects. This suggests that visual aspects do have the ability to influence ASMR, but appear to be less vital to the experience than effective trigger sounds.
The interaction between sound and visuals displayed in ASMR videos is especially apparent in those results probing preferences of spatial distance from variously sized trigger object manipulations; Though the visual details of pouring liquid are intuitively better viewable from close range, the intensity of reported tingling sensations from viewing such an action remain high at distances less appropriate for viewing finer visual details. This result likely arose from the confounding factor of sound, the noises associated with pouring liquid being louder than those associated with origami or towel folding. As sounds can be appreciated from a further distance, louder stimuli remain effective regardless of the finer visual details being visible. This also suggests that auditory triggers may trigger ASMR more readily than visual triggers.
Providing additional contextual information about manipulated trigger objects may allow for a more intense ASMR experience for some viewers. Answers to questions probing this aspect were extremely mixed, with near equal support for ‘agree’ and ‘disagree’ options, and many remaining neutral. It seems that extra context to environments and triggers would enhance the viewing experience for some viewers.
In line with the relaxed, flow-like nature of ASMR videos, many tend to be slow paced, taking time to focus closely on trigger objects and sounds. The ideal length to focus on each trigger was rated as between 1 and 10 min. The spread of data in the current study seems to indicate that around 5–7 min would be palatable to the largest number of viewers. Nearly half of ASMR enthusiasts can comfortably focus on two triggers at once, but it may be wise to err on the side of caution, including only one at a time where possible.
The results suggest that sounds contained within ASMR content should be as realistic as possible, closely representing actual sounds that would be made by the object or material being manipulated. Ratings also suggested that the progression of the video and any actions or object manipulations shown should not feel forced, or appear overly scripted to the point of seeming unnatural. This is likely to be related to factors of flow state, as several results across both this and previous research (
Barratt & Davis, 2015
) suggest that an effortless, flow-like feel to content is conducive to ASMR induction.
Most respondents agreed that background music does not add to the experience of ASMR media, and in the majority of cases prevents the viewer from experiencing tingles. It is likely that background music would negatively affect the realism of the ASMR content, introducing a sense that it has been scripted, which was highlighted as a potentially off-putting feature in qualitative comments. Alternatively, background music may obscure trigger sounds, reducing their effectiveness. Therefore, background music should be avoided where possible when producing ASMR content.
For the majority of viewers, it seems that trigger sounds are effective without the object making the sound being shown on screen. As it is unlikely to be aversive to viewers to see the objects portrayed, however, those seeking to create ASMR stimuli may be wise to favour showing trigger objects on screen.
In this study, we demonstrate that several factors affect the experience of ASMR from media. Although ASMR triggers are highly variable between people, we found in general that videos should appear natural (unscripted); that sounds should be natural and lower-pitched, and that background music should not be used; mouth sounds should be avoided due to their divisiveness; that a focus on fine visual detail is effective; and that only a single trigger need be used.
It would potentially be advantageous in future research to devise a way to steer away from self-report data in order to more solidly establish the understanding of the sensory nature of ASMR, for example through covert motor or physiological monitoring. It is hoped that the current work may inform efforts to move in this direction.
Additional Information and Declarations
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Author Contributions
Emma L. Barratt
conceived and designed the experiments, performed the experiments, analysed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Charles Spence
conceived and designed the experiments, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Nick J. Davis
conceived and designed the experiments, analysed the data, contributed reagents/materials/analysis tools, wrote the paper, prepared figures and/or tables, reviewed drafts of the paper.
Human Ethics
The following information was supplied relating to ethical approvals (i.e. approving body and any reference numbers):
Approval was granted by the Ethics Committee of Manchester Metropolitan University, United Kingdom (Approval number: HPSC-1454).
Data Availability
The following information was supplied regarding data availability:
The cleaned and anonymised output of the online questionnaire has been provided as a
Supplemental File
.
