ArticleScientific reports2018
Slow touch targeting CT-fibres does not increase prosocial behaviour in economic laboratory tasks.
Article in Scientific reports, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Affective touch and face recognition: effects on memory and metacognitive performance.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The Effect of Temporary Group Identity on Adolescent Social Mindfulness Decisions: An Empirical Study Using Team Sports Contexts.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Propensity to trust shapes perceptions of comforting touch between trustworthy human and robot partners.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Experiencing sweet taste is associated with an increase in prosocial behavior.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Altruistic acting caused by a touching hand: neural underpinnings of the Midas touch effect.Social cognitive and affective neuroscience · 2022Article
- Pleasantness Only?Experimental psychology · 2020Article
- Role of the right temporoparietal junction in intergroup bias in trust decisions.Human brain mapping · 2020Article
- Calming Effects of Touch in Human, Animal, and Robotic Interaction-Scientific State-of-the-Art and Technical Advances.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Review
- The semiotics of the message and the messenger: How nonverbal communication affects fairness perception.Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Field studies have demonstrated that humans become more generous, helpful and compliant after having been touched by another person. Here, we explored whether these effects are larger for touch activating the C-tactile (CT) fibres, as it is ascribed a particular role in establishing and maintaining bonds and affiliative interactions. The role of CT-targeted and non-targeted touch on prosocial behaviour was investigated in three different experiments using a trust game and a task measuring individual differences in social value orientations (the SVO task). Whereas participants in general acted prosocially, there was no influence of CT-targeted touch on prosocial behaviour, both in comparison to non-CT-targeted control touch and visual (non-tactile) stimulation. The null findings were further corroborated by Bayesian statistics. Thus, under the controlled laboratory conditions employed, CT-targeted touch did not play a particular role in prosocial behaviour. This indicates that touch does not increase prosocial behaviour in the absence of meaningful social and psychological connotations. Any touch related effects on prosocial behaviour likely depends on the ecological validity of the situation.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.