The Effects of Acute Stress on Inhibitory Control in Individuals with Problem Gambling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Poor inhibitory control is a hallmark of problem gambling (PG), which is characterised by frequent gambling and unsuccessful efforts to control/stop gambling. Stress and PG demonstrate a cyclical relationship, whereby gambling can act as a coping mechanism for dealing with stressful life events, while consistent gambling engagement can increase stress. To date, few studies examine acute stress effects on inhibitory control (IC) in this group. Purpose: This study compares acute stress effects on IC in PG and healthy control (HC) populations. Methods: Twenty participants with PG and twenty HCs completed self-report measures of mood disturbance (Profile of Mood States; POMS) and impulsivity (Barratt Impulsiveness Scale); saliva samples were collected to measure cortisol. The Trier Social Stress Test was administered to induce an acute stress response, followed by the Stop-Signal Task (SST), a validated measure of IC. Results: Subjective stress responses increased over time in both groups, with the PG group demonstrating significantly higher POMS ratings (p<.05), however, no differences in cortisol levels were observed between groups (p>.05). Moreover, no group differences were observed on the SST (p>.05). Exploratory correlations revealed significant positive and negative correlations between cortisol levels and ‘go’ reaction time and ‘stop’ signal reaction time on the SST, respectively (p<.05). Conclusion: This study is the first, to our knowledge, to directly examine acute psychosocial stress effects on IC in individuals with PG. Our findings show that while both groups display similar cortisol levels, individuals with PG report increased subjective stress relative to HCs. Despite no stress-induced impairments on SST performance, significant correlations were observed between task reaction time and cortisol levels in the PG group. This study helps to better inform clinical practice by providing a comprehensive understanding of the implications of stress and IC on gambling behaviours.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".