Acute stress differentially alters reward-related decision making and inhibitory control under threat of punishment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acute stress has various effects on cognition, executive function and certain forms of cost/benefit decision making. Recent studies in rodents indicate that acute stress differentially alters reward-related decisions involving particular types of costs and slows choice latencies. Yet, how stress alters decisions where rewards are linked to punishment is less clear. We examined how 1 h restraint stress, followed by behavioral testing 10 min later altered action-selection on two tasks involving reward-seeking under threat of punishment in well-trained male and female rats. One study used a risky decision-making task involving choice between a small/safe reward and a large/risky one that could coincide with shock, delivered with a probability that increased over blocks of trials. Stress increased risk aversion and punishment sensitivity, reducing preference for the larger/risky reward, while increasing decision latencies and trial omissions in both sexes, when rats were teste. A second study used a "behavioral control" task, requiring inhibition of approach towards a readily available reward associated with punishment. Here, food pellets were delivered over discrete trials, half of which coincided with a 12 s audiovisual cue, signalling that reward retrieval prior to cue termination would deliver shock. Stress exerted sex- and timing-dependent effects on inhibitory control. Males became more impulsive and received more shocks on the stress test, whereas females were unaffected on the stress test, and were actually less impulsive when tested 24 h later. None of the effects of restraint stress were recapitulated by systemic treatment with physiological doses of corticosterone. These findings suggest acute stress induces qualitatively distinct and sometimes sex-dependent effects on punished reward-seeking that are critically dependent on whether animals must either choose between different actions or withhold them to obtain rewards and avoid punishment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".