Harming another person is considered immoral and punished. However, an exception is made when violence corresponds to a reaction to
an external threat, i.e., self-defense. Forgiveness for these violent acts is often explained with legal and moral considerations. However,
I suggest that tolerance towards self-defense may also be understood by the considerating the impact of threats on the victim’s emotions
and Sense of Agency (SoA), i.e., the feeling of controlling one’s actions. The main objective of THREATENED is to examine threat
perception and self-defense from the victim’s standpoint. To this aim, I will combine individual (WP1) and multi-agent (WP2) SoA
tasks with fear conditioning procedures, which allow to study how individuals learn to fear a threatening stimulus (CS+) compared with
one signaling safety (CS-). In WP1.1, I will test if SoA is lower when key presses are performed following a threatening color cue (CS
+) paired with a mildly painful electrical shock, compared to a cue signaling safety (CS-). In WP1.2, I will study if freedom of choice
increases SoA and reduces fear of CS+. In WP2.1, I will assess the impact of interpersonal threats, by comparing SoA in a threatening –
the "victim" receives a shock by a co-participant (CS+) – vs. a safe social context (CS-). In WP2.2, I will test if self-defense can counter
the detrimental effects of interpersonal threats on SoA, by letting the "victim" choose whether to avoid the electrical stimulation (flight)
or to react by sending a shock to the "aggressor" (fight). In all studies, I will gauge physiological responses to threat (Skin Conductance
Response), and I will employ electroencephalography (EEG) to measure how the victim’s brain processes the consequences of their
actions. THREATENED will produce valuable information to devise i) novel ways to interpret the feelings of control of a victim, which
could prove useful for legal authorities and ii) new therapeutic approaches for the victims of violence.