MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406211345 · doi:10.1080/10615806.2025.2450620

Identifying the most effective acute stress induction methods for producing SAM- and HPA-related physiological responses: a meta-analysis

2025· review· en· W4406211345 on OpenAlexaff
Tad T. Brunyé, Sara Anne Goring, Ester Navarro, Hannah Hart-Pomerantz, Sophia Grekin, Franziska Plessow

Bibliographic record

VenueAnxiety Stress & Coping · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicStress Responses and Cortisol
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersU.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Aviation and Missile Center
KeywordsFight-or-flight responseCardiorespiratory fitnessMeta-analysisStress (linguistics)MedicineInternal medicineBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Laboratory-based stress inductions are commonly used to elicit acute stress but vary widely in their procedures and effectiveness. We compared the effects of stress induction techniques on measures of two major biological stress systems: the early sympathetic-adrenal-medullary (SAM) and the delayed hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis response. DESIGN: A review and meta-analysis to examine the relationship between stress induction techniques on cardiorespiratory and salivary measures of SAM and HPA system activity. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified 245 reports and 700 effects. RESULTS: = 0.37) responses. Three factors moderated these associations: the stress system examined (SAM vs HPA), the specific stress induction technique employed (e.g., Cold Pressor), the physiological sampling time relative to the stress induction, and participant sex. Loud music elicited the most robust SAM-related effects, whereas combined stress inductions elicited the most robust HPA-related effects. Men showed stronger stress responses than women. CONCLUSIONS: Stress induction techniques variably elicit SAM - and HPA-related responses. Results recommend specific induction techniques for targeting stress systems, highlighting the importance of carefully selecting methodologies in laboratory contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.180
GPT teacher head0.463
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnxiety Stress & CopingSame topicStress Responses and CortisolFrench-language works237,207