Past-year relational victimization is associated with a blunted neural response to rewards in emerging adults
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".