ArticlePhysiology & behavior2025
Individual differences in stress coping are linked to working memory performance in male and female F344 rats.
Article in Physiology & behavior, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Biological sex and normative cognitive aging across spatial learning, flexibility, and working memory in Fischer 344 rats.Behavioral neuroscience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Executive dysfunction and altered stress reactivity are core features of many neuropsychiatric disorders, contributing substantially to global disability and frequently exhibiting sex-specific prevalence and symptom profiles. Understanding how stress responses normally relate to executive function, and whether these relationships differ by sex, is critical for identifying mechanisms of vulnerability and resilience. Although sex differences in stress and cognition have been reported, preclinical findings remain mixed, and few studies assess behavioral coping, endocrine responses, and working memory performance within the same subjects. In this study, we used F344 rats to examine how individual differences in behavioral and hormonal responses to acute stress relate to working memory, assessed using an operant delayed match-to-sample task. Males and females differed in stress reactivity: females exhibited greater immobility across "pre-test" and "test" sessions of the forced swim test (FST) and a more rapid decline in corticosterone (CORT) following restraint, suggesting sex-specific patterns of behavioral and physiological regulation. Despite these differences, working memory accuracy did not differ by sex, although females completed fewer trials and responded more slowly than males. Estrous cycle did not influence cognitive or non-mnemonic performance. Crucially, individual variation in FST immobility, rather than sex or CORT dynamics, was the strongest predictor of working memory accuracy. These findings bridge observed sex differences in stress reactivity with the absence of sex differences in cognition, revealing a trait-level relationship that generalizes across sexes. By jointly considering sex and individual behavioral traits, this work supports approaches to identify biologically meaningful cognitive phenotypes in preclinical models.
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.