ArticleBrain sciences2026
Uncertain Drop vs. Socially Evaluated Cold Pressor: Uncertain Stress Elicits Stronger Psychophysiological Responses and Differential Neural Oscillatory Patterns.
Article in Brain sciences, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveThis study developed the Uncertain Drop Stress Test (UDST), an uncertain stress induction paradigm based on the high survival-relevant threat of fear of falling, wherein neither the occurrence nor the timing of the fall is predictable. The aim was to compare its stress induction efficacy and neural oscillatory changes with those of the Socially Evaluated Cold Pressor Test (SECPT), a certain stress paradigm, and to examine gender differences.
methodsForty-eight participants (24 males; 24 females) were recruited. Psychological indicators (subjective stress, negative affect, and state anxiety) and physiological indicators (heart rate, heart rate variability, galvanic skin response, and salivary cortisol) were measured before and after stress to compare induction efficacy. Resting-state EEG was collected for frequency domain analysis to explore neural oscillatory changes.
resultsUDST induced more pronounced psychophysiological changes. Notably, only UDST significantly decreased heart rate variability and increased galvanic skin response. UDST triggered an "exogenous vigilance mode" characterized by enhanced high-frequency (Beta/Gamma) activity, whereas SECPT elicited an "interoceptive focusing mode" characterized by suppressed low-frequency (Theta/Alpha) activity. Females exhibited higher heart rate and Beta activity than males under both stress conditions.
conclusionsUDST elicits stronger psychophysiological responses and distinct neural oscillatory patterns, with females showing greater stress reactivity.
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.