ArticleHuman brain mapping2026
The Tap-to-Safety Task: A Novel fMRI Paradigm Assessing Repetitive Threat-Neutralization.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anxiety sensitivity and intolerance of uncertainty track distinct neurobehavioral dimensions of avoidance in anxiety-related disorders.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Article
- The Tap-to-Safety Task: A Novel fMRI Paradigm Assessing Repetitive Threat-Neutralization.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Existing experimental threat-related paradigms focus primarily on active or passive avoidance behavior, but do not model the common behavioral pattern of repetitive, effortful actions aimed at neutralizing perceived threats. Here, we describe and provide initial validation for the Tap-to-Safety (TTS) Task, a novel human paradigm designed to experimentally elicit repetitive threat-neutralization behavior during functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Adult participants completed the TTS Task; one sample completed the task online and an additional sample completed the task in person, with a subsample completing fMRI. Task stimuli included a threat cue (CS+) paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US), safety cues (CS-) never paired with the US, and safe generalization stimuli (GSs) varying in similarity to the CS+. During an extinction phase, the CS+ was no longer paired with the US. Trials included passive viewing trials, without a neutralization option; and choice trials, in which participants could tap a button repeatedly to gain protection from the US (i.e., repetitive threat-neutralization) while reducing accumulation of reward points. Linear mixed-effects models (LMEs) were used to assess behavioral and neural responses. For fMRI analyses in a subset of participants, a priori regions of interest (ROIs) were used with Bonferroni correction. In-person results (n = 49) demonstrated increased threat expectancy, anxiety, and repetitive threat-neutralization behavior that were higher to the threat cue than to safety cues (ps < 0.001, η
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.