The principal aim of this study is to investigate similarities and differences in the perception and neural processing of self-touch vs. touch received from another person (henceforth other-touch). Efference copy theory postulates that the perception of self-produced stimuli is suppressed (e.g., the famous phenomenon that we cannot tickle ourselves) and that self-touch is therefore processed differently to other-touch (for a recent review, see Boehme & Olausson, 2022): if suppressed, self-touch should be perceived as less pleasant, and neural responses dampened compared to other-touch. Indeed, when comparing self- vs. other touch, other-touch was perceived as more pleasant than self-touch, and heart rate was significantly lower during other vs. self-touch (Triscoli et al., 2017). Yet, self-touch was also rated as pleasant overall (Triscoli et al., 2017) and we frequently engage in self-touch to self soothe and regulate emotions (see e.g., Spille et al., 2021; Uvnas-Moberg, Handlin, & Peterson, 2015), indicating that we do perceive self-touch as pleasant and use it in everyday life. To our knowledge, only one study has contrasted self- vs. other-touch to examine distinctions between these kinds of touch at cortical and spinal cord levels (Boehme et al., 2019). Boehme et al. found deactivation in insula, anterior cingulate cortex, superior temporal gyrus, amygdala, parahippocampal gyrus, and prefrontal areas during self-touch vs. other-touch. However, this study did not systematically examine specific parameters of the touch, such as its velocity, linked both to C-tactile fibre activation and perceived pleasantness. Unmyelinated nerves called C-tactile (CT) afferents are activated by a particular type of slow (1-10cm/s), gentle, stroking touch (Löken et al., 2009), termed “pleasant touch” or “affective touch” because it is generally perceived as pleasant. The CT system plays a fundamental role in the beneficial impact of stroking touch from others (Morrison et al., 2010), and gentle stroking is typically used spontaneously in intimate interpersonal interactions (Croy et al., 2020), and can communicate prosocial intentions (Kirsch et al., 2018). Self-stroking is also tuned to CT-fibre activation (Triscoli et al., 2017). However, the perception and neural processing of self-touch vs. other-touch at CT-optimal (vs. faster, non-CT-optimal velocities) has not yet been systematically examined. Using a repeated-measures paradigm in which we experimentally vary (1) touch velocity (3cm/s i.e., a slow CT-optimal velocity generally perceived as pleasant vs. 18cm/s, a faster non-CT-optimal velocity which is generally perceived as neutral) and (2) person administering the touch (participant self-touch vs. touch from experimenter), we measure touch perception by self-report, and neural correlates (neural oscillations in delta, theta, alpha, beta, gamma bands; P300 and ultra-late evoked potentials) using electroencephalography (see e.g., von Mohr et al., 2018; Haggarty et al., 2020). If efference copy theory is correct, we would expect dampened perception (at behavioural and neural levels) of self- compared to other-touch at both velocities (as there is no reason to assume only some self-produced stimuli would be suppressed). Conversely, following literature indicating the soothing power of self touch, similar behavioural and neural signatures for self- and other-touch especially as slow, CT-optimal (vs. faster non-CT-optimal) velocities would be expected if self- vs. other touch share similar underlying neural processes (e.g., decreased theta band activity in response to CT-optimal touch as found for other-touch (von Mohr et al., 2018; Kraus et al., 2020). A third possibility is that CT-optimal self- and other-touch are perceived as equally pleasant but are processed in distinct ways, in which case we expect different patterns of neural oscillations depending on the person administering the touch, especially for CT-optimal touch. As an additional exploratory question, we introduce a between-subjects cross-cultural component: half of the participants will be recruited in the UK (current ethics application) and half in Chile (separate ethics application to be submitted). Most touch research is carried out in WEIRD (western, educated, industrialised, rich and demographic) contexts (Henrich et al., 2010), neglecting cross-cultural differences. How the perception of affective touch varies across cultures is important to study given cultural and social contextual influences on the frequency and types of touch individuals are likely to experience from early childhood through adulthood (Sorokowska et al., 2021). UK is a low-contact culture, with low allowed touch (Suvilehto et al., 2015), while touch is more acceptable in Chile (higher-contact culture; greater frequency of physical contact), though little research has quantified touch norms or self-touch frequencies across cultures, adding to the exploratory nature of this aspect of the study.