Stress and Stress-Induced Glucocorticoids Facilitate Empathic Accuracy in Men but Have No Effects for Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Empathy, the ability to understand the feelings of other people, is critical for navigating our social world and maintaining social connections. Given that acute stress, and resulting increased glucocorticoids, triggers a shift in two large-scale brain networks, prioritizing salience over executive control, we predicted that acute psychosocial stress would facilitate empathic accuracy. We also investigated the moderating role of gender, given that men typically show a more robust glucocorticoid response to acute stress than women. As predicted, results from two independent experiments ( N = 267 college-age participants; 2,256 observations) showed that acute psychosocial stress facilitated empathic accuracy for men, an effect related to their glucocorticoid response in the stress condition. Conversely, psychosocial stress had no effect on empathic accuracy for women, who also showed a smaller cortisol response to stress than men. Exploratory analyses further revealed that women taking oral contraceptives performed worse on the empathic-accuracy task than regularly cycling women. This research highlights the important, but complex, role of stress in cognitive empathy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".