MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6998843352

Association of trait anxiety and sex with amygdala responses to fearful faces during attention and memory tasks

2006· dissertation· en· W6998843352 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsAmygdalaAssociation (psychology)AnxietyTrait anxietyAnterior cingulate cortexNeural correlates of consciousnessTrait
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Individual differences in sex and trait anxiety (TA) have been suggested as important mediators of behavioural and neural responses to threat-related stimuli. In this study, the relationship between sex, TA and the processing of threat-related stimuli (fearful faces) was explored in healthy individuals. During fMRI scanning, 32 participants completed tasks probing two facets of emotional function: responses to unattended fearful faces and emotional memory. Interactions between TA and sex were observed in both behaviour and brain activity. In women, higher TA was associated with a stronger amygdala response to unattended fearful faces, whereas no such relationship was present in males. Also, in women only, high TA was associated with stronger anterior cingulate and left amygdala activity when fearful faces were successfully encoded. These findings may contribute to an understanding of the higher incidence of anxiety disorders in women than men.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)→Same topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes→French-language works237,207→