ArticlePloS one2026
Mapping the landscape of psychological literature on threat from 1961 to 2023 through structural topic modeling.
Article in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The past decades have generated a substantial volume of psychological literature on threat. However, the absence of systematic cross-field synthesis has resulted in limited understanding of major research domains and relationships between different lines of threat research. We analyzed 51,903 psychological publications on threat retrieved from APA PsycInfo, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection that were published between 1961 and 2023. We conducted structural topic modeling on publication titles and abstracts to identify key research topics, and network analysis on the resulting topics to map the thematic structure of the literature. 25 topics emerged, organized into four thematic areas through exploratory graph analysis: 1) threat processing mechanisms, 2) health and clinical threats, 3) social psychological threats, and 4) collective threats. Network analysis revealed differential connectivity patterns within and between thematic areas. Areas showed limited connectivity with each other and no area emerged as a central hub, suggesting gaps in cross-domain integration. Topic prevalence trends revealed diversification in research interest over time, together with responsiveness to broader developments within psychology and evolving societal concerns. Notably, mechanism-focused research declined over the past decade while event-driven research on specific threats increased, indicating reactive rather than theory-driven investigation. These findings provide insights into the landscape of psychological literature on threat and reveal critical gaps in current examinations alongside strategic opportunities to advance cross-field integration.
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.