ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2026
Investigation of human defence responses in a virtual reality environment: an EEG study.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A predatory imminence continuum displays the perceived imminence of threat to visualise the risk to the prey. Most human studies have utilised static paradigms that may lack ecological validity and limit the exploration of defensive behaviours. Therefore, the present study investigates Fight/ Flight defence responses and underlying neural correlates using EEG under varying conditions of threat proximity and escape availability using a virtual reality (VR) environment. The experiment consisted of a desktop VR environment, including training and experimental phases (5 conditions). Conditions 1 to 4, except 5, included a threat avatar. The conditions differed based on threat proximity (distal/ proximal) and participant's escapability (escape/no-escape). Twenty trials were presented, with each condition presented 4 times. Participants responded with a Fight/Flight response to the threat, followed by a 10-s rest scene and a 5-s fixation. A significant difference in reaction time was observed, indicating distinction based on threat proximity and escapability. A heightened Fight response was observed across all conditions. This pattern may reflect the absence of consequences associated with defensive actions compared to real-life scenarios. For the electrophysiological analysis, ERP analysis indicated a significant difference in the Late frontal activity at the F1 electrode across all conditions. This may suggest tentative cognitive processing during the period surrounding defensive response (Fight or Flight) selection and execution. Together, the findings indicate that although the lack of consequences may have promoted the Fight response more in the VR scenarios, the neural responses may have shown differences in cognitive processing.
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.