Trial reportBiopsychosocial science and medicine
Differential Effects of Body Posture on Biological and Psychological Responses in the Trier Social Stress Test.
Trial report in Biopsychosocial science and medicine. 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.
- Salivary cortisol reactivity to stress in pregnancy: A scoping review.Psychoneuroendocrinology · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveAcute stress protocols are important tools for laboratory research on acute stress mechanisms. Several reasons necessitate varying body posture. However, the effect of such variations has not been systematically studied. We therefore examined the impact of body posture (sitting vs. standing) on biological and psychological stress responses induced by the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) and its control condition (friendly TSST; f-TSST).
methodsOne hundred four participants (57.69% female, mean age: 22.28, SD = 3.44) were randomly assigned to the sitting versus standing group and underwent the TSST and f-TSST on 2 separate days in randomized order. Stress responses were measured through salivary cortisol and alpha-amylase, HR, HRV, and self-reports.
resultsBiological stress responses were higher in the TSST condition and the standing group (eg, maximum cortisol increase: p = .004). Psychological stress response was higher in the stress condition (eg, negative affect : p < .001), but was not different between posture groups (eg, negative affect : p = .819). No differences were observed in any markers after adjusting the stress-response measures for the non-stress condition (smallest p = .173).
conclusionsAlthough biological, but not psychological stress responses were affected by body posture overall, these effects did not persist when responses in the stress condition were adjusted by subtracting the non-stress values from the f-TSST. This implies that the effect of body posture can be neglected in studies with a non-stress control condition, but that its effects should be taken into account in studies with only the stress protocol.
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.