Stressful Life Events and Reward Processing in Adults: Moderation by Depression and Anhedonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background. Exposure to acute stress is associated with reduced reward processing in laboratory studies in animals and humans. However, less clear is the association between reward processing and exposure to naturalistic stressful life events. The goal of the current study was to provide a novel investigation of the relation between past 6-month stressful life events and reward processing, and the extent to which this relation was moderated by depression diagnostic status and state symptoms of anhedonia. Methods. The current study included a secondary analysis of data from 107 adults (37 current-depressed, 25 past-depressed, 45 never-depressed; 75% women) drawn from two previous community studies. Past 6-month stressful life events were assessed with a rigorous contextual interview with independent ratings. Response to monetary reward was assessed with a probabilistic reward task. Results. Among current-depressed participants, and among both current- and past-depressed participants with high levels of anhedonia, greater exposure to independent life events outside of individuals’ control was significantly associated with poorer reward learning. In direct contrast, among those with low levels of anhedonia, greater exposure to independent life events was significantly associated with a greater overall bias toward the more frequently rewarded stimulus. Conclusions. Results suggest that depression and anhedonia are uniquely associated with vulnerability to blunted reward learning in the face of uncontrollable stressors. In contrast, in the absence of anhedonia symptoms, heightened reward processing during or following independent stressful life event exposure may represent an adaptive response.
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".