Effects of testosterone enanthate on aggression, risk-taking, competition, mood, and other cognitive domains during 28 days of severe energy deprivation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Behavioral effects of testosterone depend on dose, acute versus sustained formulation, duration of administration, personality, genetics, and endogenous levels of testosterone. There are also considerable differences between effects of endogenous and exogenous testosterone. OBJECTIVES: This study was the secondary behavioral arm of a registered clinical trial designed to determine if testosterone protects against loss of lean body mass and lower-body muscle function induced by a severe energy deficit typical of sustained military operations. METHODS: Behavioral effects of repeated doses of testosterone on healthy young men whose testosterone was reduced by severe energy deficit were examined. This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, between-group study. Effects of four weekly intramuscular injections of testosterone enanthate (200 mg/week, N = 24) or matching placebo (N = 26) were evaluated. Determination of sample size was based on changes in lean body mass. Tasks assessing aggression, risk-taking, competition, social cognition, vigilance, memory, executive function, and mood were repeatedly administered. RESULTS: During a period of artificially induced, low testosterone levels, consistent behavioral effects of administration of exogenous testosterone were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Exogeneous testosterone enanthate (200 mg/week) during severe energy restriction did not reliably alter the measures of cognition. Study limitations include the relatively small sample size compared to many studies of acute testosterone administration. The findings are specific to healthy males experiencing severe energy deficit and should not be generalized to effects of other doses, formulations, or acute administration of endogenous testosterone or studies conducted with larger samples using tests of cognitive function designed to detect specific effects of testosterone.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".