Endocannabinoid contributions to the perception of socially relevant, affective touch in humans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social relationships are central to well-being. A subgroup of afferent nerve fibers, C-tactile (CT) afferents, are primed to respond to affective, socially relevant touch and may mitigate the effects of stress. The endocannabinoid ligand anandamide (AEA) modulates both social reward and stress. We thus hypothesized that AEA levels would be associated with the perceived pleasantness of affective touch in humans. Across two studies, we explored perceptions of affective, socially relevant touch and general affective stimuli. In study 1, adult participants (N = 101) were recruited based on presence (CM+) or absence (CM-) of documented childhood maltreatment (N = 52 CM+; N = 49 CM-). In study 2, healthy individuals were randomized to receive an inhibitor of fatty acid amide hydrolase (FAAH; PF-04457845) to increase AEA levels (n = 16) or placebo (n = 29). Outcomes included self-report ratings of touch pleasantness and intensity, valence and arousal ratings of affective images, and plasma levels of endocannabinoids AEA and 2-AG, cortisol, and oxytocin. In study 1, higher AEA levels were associated with a reduced preference for affective, CT-optimal touch. In study 2, pharmacological elevation of AEA resulted in reduced preference for affective touch. These effects were specific to social processing, as AEA levels were not related to ratings of affective images. In contrast to our hypothesis, elevated AEA was associated with reduced pleasantness ratings of CT-optimal, affective touch. This provides novel, in-human data linking AEA to social processing, adding nuance to the rationale for its use as a potential novel therapeutic target in disordered in social processing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".