ArticleScientific reports2025
Preliminary experimental support for a vulnerability theory of emotional bonding.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In an internet-based study with a diverse group of 1000 adult participants in the US, support was found for a "vulnerability theory of emotional bonding" (VTEB), according to which the strength of a new emotional bond can be predicted by measures of the vulnerability that each of two persons shows with respect to one another, where vulnerability is defined by measures of states of need and empathy. In a pre-manipulation-post-manipulation design, participants were first asked questions regarding their current states of need and empathy, then shown a photograph of a male confederate and asked questions regarding their feelings toward him. Participants were then randomly assigned to one of four groups in which they viewed a video showing the confederate responding to a set of questions about cancer but showing, in each of the four respective groups, reactions indicating either (1) low need and low empathy, (2) low need and high empathy, (3) high need and low empathy, or (4) high need and high empathy, following which participants were again asked questions regarding their feelings toward the confederate. As predicted, new bonds were weakest when need and empathy states were low, and highest when need and empathy states were high. The study suggests that further research may make it possible to develop a formal and predictive theory of emotional bonding of the form B = f (N
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.