MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280550545 · doi:10.1113/ep090396

The acute effect of a laboratory shame induction protocol on endothelial function in young, healthy adults

2022· article· en· W4280550545 on OpenAlexafffund
Ellen McGarity‐Shipley, Lindsay A. Lew, Jacob T. Bonafiglia, Kyra E. Pyke

Bibliographic record

VenueExperimental Physiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicEmotions and Moral Behavior
Canadian institutionsResponse Biomedical (Canada)Queen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsShameHyperaemiaMedicineBrachial arteryInternal medicineEndocrinologyPsychologySocial psychologyBlood pressureBlood flow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

NEW FINDINGS: What is the central question of this study? Shame is a form of social stress that involves internalizing social devaluations imposed by others. The aim of this study was to determine, for the first time, how acutely experienced shame impacts endothelial function. What is the main finding and its importance? Brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation, an index of endothelial function, was impaired after an intervention that acutely increased self-reported shame. This occurred without increases in cortisol or tumor necrosis factor alpha receptor binding. Frequent or prolonged shame-induced endothelial dysfunction could have important cardiovascular consequences. ABSTRACT: The objective of this study was to examine the impact of a shame induction protocol on endothelial function. Fifteen participants (n = 7 men, n = 8 women) completed both a written shame induction protocol and a control protocol on two different experimental days. Pre- and post-protocol we assessed: (1) endothelial function and arterial shear rate via a standard brachial artery reactive hyperaemia flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) test across two post-intervention time points (15 and 35 min post); (2) perceived shame via the experiential shame scale (ESS); and (3) cortisol and soluble tumor necrosis factor alpha receptor (sTNFαRII) through oral fluid analysis. Shame increased after the shame induction protocol (pre, 2.9 ± 0.6 vs. post, 3.7 ± 0.5, P < 0.001) but not the control protocol (pre, 3.0 ± 0.5 vs. post, 2.8 ± 0.5, P = 0.15; protocol by time interaction, P < 0.001). When all three time points were included in the analysis, %FMD did not change over time. Considering only the lowest post time point, %FMD decreased significantly in response to the shame protocol (pre, 4.8 ± 1.9 vs. post, 3.2 ± 1.6, P < 0.001) but not the control protocol (pre, 4.2 ± 1.8 vs. post, 3.8 ± 1.5, P = 0.45; protocol by time interaction, P = 0.035). Covariation of the shear rate stimulus for FMD did not alter the FMD results. When including both the control and shame protocols, but not the shame protocol alone, increased shame was significantly associated with decreased FMD (r = -0.37, P < 0.046). There were no significant time by protocol interaction effects for cortisol or sTNFαRII. In conclusion, temporary increases in shame might cause transient endothelial dysfunction which, if chronically repeated, could manifest as reduced vasoprotection against atherosclerosis.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.339 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExperimental PhysiologySame topicEmotions and Moral BehaviorFrench-language works237,207