MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2520975835 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0163077

Social Involvement Modulates the Response to Novel and Adverse Life Events in Mice

2016· article· en· W2520975835 on OpenAlexaff
Luca Colnaghi, Kelly Clemenza, Sarah E. Groleau, Shira Weiss, Anna M. Snyder, Mariana Lopez-Rosas, Amir Levine

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychological resilienceAdverse effectPsychologySocial stressExtinction (optical mineralogy)MedicineDevelopmental psychologyBiologySocial psychologyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Epidemiological findings suggest that social involvement plays a major role in establishing resilience to adversity, however, the neurobiology by which social involvement confers protection is not well understood. Hypothesizing that social involvement confers resilience by changing the way adverse life events are encoded, we designed a series of behavioral tests in mice that utilize the presence or absence of conspecific cage mates in measuring response to novel and adverse events. We found that the presence of cage mates increased movement after exposure to a novel environment, increased time spent in the open arms of the elevated plus maze, and decreased freezing time after a foot shock as well as expedited fear extinction, therefore significantly changing the response to adversity. This is a first description of a mouse model for the effects of social involvement on adverse life events. Understanding how social involvement provides resilience to adversity may contribute to the future treatment and prevention of mental and physical illness.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.098
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorFrench-language works237,207