ReviewNeurobiology of stress2024
Acute stress differentially alters reward-related decision making and inhibitory control under threat of punishment.
Review in Neurobiology of stress, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dissecting the contribution of mu and kappa opioid receptor signalling in effort and delay-related cost/benefit decision making.Psychopharmacology · 2026Article
- Effects of repeated social stress on risk assessment behaviors and response to diazepam in the elevated plus maze in adult male rats.Behavioral neuroscience · 2025Article
- When Games Influence Words: Gaming Addiction among College Students Increases Verbal Aggression through Risk-Biased Drifting in Decision-Making.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed 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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.