Cannabis use is associated with sexually dimorphic changes in executive control of visuospatial decision-making
Bibliographic record
Abstract
When the outcome of a choice is less favorable than expected, humans and animals typically shift to an alternate choice option on subsequent trials. Several lines of evidence indicate that this "lose-shift" responding is an innate sensorimotor response strategy that is normally suppressed by executive function. Therefore, the lose-shift response provides a covert gauge of cognitive control over choice mechanisms. We report here that the spatial position, rather than visual features, of choice targets drives the lose-shift effect. Furthermore, the ability to inhibit lose-shift responding to gain reward is different among male and female habitual cannabis users. Increased self-reported cannabis use was concordant with suppressed response flexibility and an increased tendency to lose-shift in women, which reduced performance in a choice task in which random responding is the optimal strategy. On the other hand, increased cannabis use in men was concordant with reduced reliance on spatial cues during decision-making, and had no impact on the number of correct responses. These data (63,600 trials from 106 participants) provide strong evidence that spatial-motor processing is an important component of economic decision-making, and that its governance by executive systems is different in men and women who use cannabis frequently.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".