MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2895878446 · doi:10.1093/scan/nsy091

Past-year relational victimization is associated with a blunted neural response to rewards in emerging adults

2018· article· en· W2895878446 on OpenAlexaff
Paige Ethridge, Aislinn Sandre, Melanie A. Dirks, Anna Weinberg

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAnhedoniaPsychologyPsychopathologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anhedonia is associated with multiple forms of psychopathology, yet relatively, little is known about how anhedonia develops. Emerging evidence suggests that anhedonia is the result of interactions between life stress and the brain's reward systems, and that social stress, in particular, may drive these processes. One potent form of social stress is peer victimization, but very little research has focused on peer victimization beyond adolescence, and even less has examined the associations between peer victimization and neural response to rewards. The present study sought to identify associations between past-year history of peer victimization and neural response to rewards in emerging adults (N = 61). Relational and physical forms of victimization were assessed separately since these distinct types of social stress have different trajectories across development and different associations with psychopathology. Reward sensitivity was indexed with the event-related potential component known as the reward positivity, which was elicited using a forced-choice monetary reward guessing task. Results demonstrated that past-year relational, but not physical, victimization was associated with a blunted neural response to rewards. These findings provide insight into one potential mechanism in the etiology of anhedonia, which may, in turn, help us to better identify pathways to multiple psychopathologies.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score0.565

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Cognitive and Affective NeuroscienceSame topicChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207