Administering testosterone augments endogenous, but not exogenous visual orienting of attention in males
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Visual orienting of attention in healthy human males was examined following the administration of testosterone (T). In males, T has been found to influence the dopaminergic system which has been found to change the efficiency of various cognitive functions such as stimulus identification and inhibition of response output. Similarly, high levels of Estrogen associated with a female's ovulatory phase have been linked to higher dopaminergic activity and then larger inhibition effects during paradigms involving reflexive orienting of attention. Overall, individual differences in visual attention are potentially due to both distinct neural structures and variations in hormone levels. In this study, the influence of T on reflexive and volitional orienting of visual attention was investigated. Sixteen participants completed both an exogenous and an endogenous cueing task on two days of testing that were separated by two weeks. On each day, participants were administered either T or a placebo. The expected inhibition of return (IOR) was observed in the exogenous task, F(1, 15) = 39.05, p< 0.001. However, T did not moderate IOR (p= 0.266). Participants also demonstrated the expected cueing effects during the endogenous task, F(2, 30) = 25.5, p< 0.001. However, following T administration, there was a much longer delay responding to a target after an invalid cue, F(2, 30) = 5.65, p< 0.008. The results indicate that hormone levels can influence visual orienting of attention in a state specific manner. The data support the notion that individual differences in inhibitory control are dependent upon hormonal levels and/or neural-structural variation.Acknowledgments: SH supported by CFI. JMC supported by NSERC.
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".