Physical- and Cognitive-Effort-Based Decision-Making in Depression: Relationships to Symptoms and Functioning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with persistent, impaired life functioning. Motivational deficits in physical and cognitive effort expenditure have not been evaluated as contributors to functional impairment in MDD. In this study, we adapted parallel measures of choices to expend physical and cognitive effort and assessed their associations with symptoms, cognition, and life functioning in 44 participants with MDD. Higher anhedonia severity predicted lower motivation for physical effort but not for cognitive effort. Lower cognitive effort motivation was associated with poorer life functioning even after controlling for previously established predictors of symptoms and cognitive impairment. Reduced cognitive effort motivation also had an indirect effect on the relationship between impaired cognitive and life functioning. Findings suggest motivational deficits in MDD present different barriers for recovery depending on the type of effort that is avoided. Physical effort motivation is associated with anhedonia severity, whereas cognitive effort motivation is relevant to life functioning.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it