Sound Quality Factors Inducing the Autonomous Sensory Meridian Response

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

General feedback

-          Very important study for understanding ASMR trigger sounds

-          Well done methods

-          Missing some key understandings about ASMR that would help the authors draw better and additional conclusions/interpretations.  For example, authors need to understand the importance of Personal Attention as the context of ASMR stimulation and how Personal attention/Context is different than triggers/stimuli.  This understanding will help them to see additional important interpretations of their data.

-          Manuscript needs an English reader/writer to fix many typos and flow issues.

Abstract

-          Suggested word change of “Internet channels” to Internet platforms.

-          Rewrite abstract to match any changes made to the manuscript (suggestions below)

Intro

-          First sentence needs to include ‘light touch’ as a common trigger for ASMR.  Ok to later ignore this type of trigger when talking about recorded or transmitted audio/video-only triggers.

-          Fix typo of “crip” to “crisp”

-          Although citing another work, please explain that “Personal attention” is not a “trigger”, it is the context for triggers/stimuli.  This important understanding of ASMR is missing from the manuscript.  Personal attention is the scenario/context in which the triggers occur.  Your data is supporting this by showing the importance of “closeness” as a sound characteristic of triggering ASMR.  Nature sounds are something we often perceive from a distance, which is why they are rarely reported on the internet as strong/typical ASMR triggers.

Method

-          First statement is incorrect, nature sounds are NOT considered typical ASMR trigger sounds.  Only human behavior sounds are considered typical ASMR triggers.  This is a deep understanding in the ASMR community, although there is not published data about this.  This should really be the main point of your introduction; to be the first study to compare human-generated sounds to nature-generated sounds for ASMR stimulation potential (in addition to identifying sound characteristics for stimulating ASMR).

-          Better to call the 2 groups: Human-generated sounds and Nature-generated sounds

-          Were the sounds recorded “binaurally” or just in stereo?  If true binaural, then please provide info about the exact binaural equipment used (dummy head/ears/disk?).  Info about true binaural recording: https://www.soundonsound.com/techniques/introduction-binaural-recording.  If just used 2 microphones then restate it as a ‘stereo recording’.  Explain make/model/type/polarity of the microphones.

-          It is unclear how the “HEAD AND TORSO SIMULATOR” was being used by the participants, please explain more clearly.  This seems like a device that could record binaurally, but the placement and explanation in the methods is very confusing and unclear.  Please explain the exact use of this device.

Table 1

-          Title should specify “…ASMR trigger sounds…”

-          Fix Typos = carvonated, stiring, tipping, shapness

-          Fix short titles so they all are nouns

Table 2

-          Table 2 Seems like it should come after Table 1 and Figure 2, because it is comparing data from Table 1 and Figure 2 (?). 

-          Similarly, the columns in Table 2 should be switched to better represent the order the data is presented in the paper.

Figure 3

-          Confusing because (a) and (b) are just nature sounds, and (c) is just human-generated sounds – but many viewers won’t realize this if they don’t read the Figure description carefully.  Better to have 3 graphs of Nature Sounds and 3 graphs of human generated sounds (each labeled clearly), so viewers can quickly and easily see how Loudness influences Nature sounds but not Human sounds.

Results (or Discussion)

-          Please add some clear statements that state something like, “The 3 sounds with the strongest ASMR values were…, and this is what they had in common…”   “The 3 sounds with the lowest ASMR values were…, and this is what they had in common.” 

Discussion

-          Great first paragraph, you just need to include the important aspect of context (positive, personal attention) to explain your findings even better.

Conclusions

-          Missing the key finding that human-generated sounds are more likely to trigger stronger ASMR than nature sounds.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for reading my manuscript.

I put my answers for your comments in the attached file.

Please read it.

Best regards,

Ryota Shimokura 

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

This article is interesting but it is not within the scope or aims of Audiology Research journal. There is no reference to auditory or vestibular symptoms. There is no reference to show how the findings of this manuscript can help those with auditory disorders. There is no reference to the use of ASMR to treat tinnitus or hyperacusis. There is some literature that correlates ASMR to misophonia; however, the authors have not mentioned them. You may want to submit to a different publication such as those in the field of psychology OR rewrite your manuscript and show the value of your work to those in the field of auditory and vestibular medicine. 

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for reading my manuscript.

I put my answers for your comments in the attache file.

Please read it.

Best regards,

Ryota Shimokura

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 3 Report

This is a very interesting paper. I did not know this subject and the authors explain it thoroughly throughout the introduction.

I have a few comments:

1. The method is not written in the acceptable manner of participants, tasks, and procedure. I think it still is very clear, so the authors should decide whether they want to write it as acceptable and make it easier for the reader to find the appropriate information.

2. Results - I feel the results should be described differently. Contrary to what the authors say, I think some measures show a tendency to be higher/lower (such as comfort, closeness, and ASMR). The others are inconsistent, which is how the results should be described.

3. Discussion - at the beginning of this section there are results that should be reported in the Results section, and only leave the interpretation here.

Author Response

Dear Reviewer,

thank you for reading my manuscript.

I put my answers for your comments in the attache file.

Please read it.

Best regards,

Ryota Shimokura

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Thank you for making some changes to your manuscript to address the interests of the readers of this journal.

There are some minor changes that you need to address. Also, there are some grammatical errors  that I suggest you ask an independent reader to review it for you.

1. In Introduction what do you mean by "using several languages"?

2. In methods "music distributed sites" change to "music distribution sites".

3. Under task you mention " 45 dB"? What is the dB reference? dB A, dB SPL?

4. Please fix "The very closed sound makes the listeners imagined..." to "The very closed sound makes the listeners imagine..."

5. In general you have improved the quality of this paper to fit the goals of this journal. 

Author Response

Dear Professor,

I thank the reviewer for giving your precious time and energy on reviewing my paper in the second time more carefully. 

The answers for your revision were described in the attached file.

Best regards,

Ryota Shimokura

Author Response File: Author Response.docx