ArticlePloS one2025
Social anxiety influences the stress-buffering potential of social presence: Evidence from cardiovascular and affective reactivity under stress.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Maternal Social Support Reshapes the Offspring Brain Transcriptome to Buffer Prenatal Stress in Mice.Research square · 2026Article
- From Molecules to Meaning: Integrating Neuropeptides, Sociostasis, and Hormesis in the Brain-Heart Axis.Current issues in molecular biology · 2026Review
- Physical Proximity With Social Support Regulates Vigilance to Threat: Evidence From Startle Reactivity During Emotional Stress Induction.Psychophysiology · 2026Article
- Outdoor activities and social support on anxiety in Chinese older adults: a cross-sectional study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Heterogeneity in medical coping modes and the moderating role of social support on social disability in patients after percutaneous coronary intervention.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
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
Social presence and social support are fundamental instrumental sources of interpersonal emotional regulation, playing a crucial role in mitigating the impact of stress and negative emotions. This study aims to improve our understanding of the role of relationship type and individual differences in social anxiety in the stress-buffering provided by co-presence of others during stress. A dyadic version of the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) was employed to experimentally induce stress in a sample of 40 dyads, each comprising a target participant who was paired with a second participant, acting as a supporter. In half of the dyads the target and the supporter were in a romantic relationship (Partner Group), while in the other half they were randomly paired (Stranger Group). Heart rate and psychological stress reactivity were collected during the TSST. Results revealed that participants in the Partner Group exhibited a lower heart rate during the acute stress compared to the participants in the Stranger Group, highlighting that the buffering of the physiological stress activity is stronger within close relationships. Nonetheless, participants in the Partner Group reported more anxiety and stress during the task. Furthermore, social anxiety showed a positive correlation with subjective stress reactivity in the participants in the Partner Group, suggesting that it may hinder the perceived benefit of social support. These findings increase our understanding of stress-buffering mechanisms, emphasizing the interplay between social support, stress reactivity, and interpersonal affective processes, also highlighting the need for additional research characterizing individual differences in social regulation of stress.
Indexed as
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.