ArticlePsychophysiology2026
Bridging Lab and Life: A Dual-Person Paradigm for Social Interaction Research.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Interpersonal synchrony, the spontaneous coordination of actions, emotions, and physiological processes, plays a crucial role in social bonding. While existing research has significantly advanced our understanding of interpersonal synchrony, many studies rely on either artificial paradigms that may limit ecological validity or naturalistic approaches that can pose challenges for achieving sufficient statistical power. To address this, we developed and validated a semi-naturalistic verbal social interaction paradigm, in which two individuals talk about a variety of standardized neutral and autobiographical emotional topics. Sixty-nine dyads (N = 138) participated and reported valence, arousal, connectedness, and dominance after each trial. Results confirmed the paradigm's reliability and validity by showing that emotional conversations, especially when sharing one's own autobiographical event, elicited higher arousal, more valence, and increased heart rate than neutral ones, with relatively stable affective responses across trials. Participants also felt more connected during emotional conversations, particularly with closer friends. In conclusion, we are optimistic that our social interaction paradigm is a useful tool for studies of dual person neuroscience by balancing experimental control and ecological validity. Its flexible design allows for adaptation across research contexts and supports broad application. This validation establishes the paradigm's reliability, enabling future hypothesis testing regarding interpersonal synchrony.
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.