Supportive social proximity can reduce neural threat responding in specific contexts.

This page isolates one claim from the wider argument of The Human OS Manual.

The classification describes the evidence supporting this claim, not the Human OS framework as a whole.

Coan, Schaefer, and Davidson experimentally examined hand-holding during threat and reported reduced neural threat responding under supportive social contact. Beckes and Coan develop Social Baseline Theory as a framework for understanding social proximity and the economy of action.

These sources do not establish that any social proximity is regulating, that all relationships reduce threat, or that supportive contact removes the physiological cost of difficult circumstances.

The public claim stays with a specific experimental threat context. The broader “regulatory cost” language belongs to Social Baseline Theory and the book’s synthesis.

Developing findings or mechanisms that help explain possibility without establishing universal outcomes or direct real-world effects.

Sources are listed according to the role they play in this claim. One source may provide direct support, another may explain a mechanism, establish a limitation, or prevent an interpretation from becoming broader than the evidence allows.

The printed book preserves the claim inside the argument that gives it meaning. These references connect the current digital record to the first-edition evidence trail.

This claim connects to the following parts of the Human OS architecture. The module labels locate the claim inside the framework; they do not imply that the research source validates the architecture itself.