ReviewCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2026
Conative inference as a mechanism of allostatic resilience: wanting to be and being to want.
Review in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Stability, mental stability in particular, is necessary for adaptive functioning. Dynamical systems existing in a changing environment must adapt to it by resolving the dialectical tension between stability and flexibility, which is captured in the concept of resilience. Allostasis is considered as a systemic mechanism of resilience and has recently been framed in terms of active inference, a theory of sentient behavior. Allostatic systems are thought to operate on the principle of self-organized criticality, which is related to free energy minimization, the central tenet of active inference theory. Based on this framework, I propose a functional brain hierarchy that supports allostasis. In it, desire and affect, framed in terms of affective inference, serve to integrate and mediate mutual constraints between cognitive and physiological homeostases. I further suggest that as allostatic organisms evolve into affective ones, they develop into conative agents, whose conation regulates their affective dynamics. At the top of this regulatory hierarchy, I propose raw desire, a domain-general global desire for positive affect (or to simply feel better). This functional hierarchy makes the raw desire-affective charge regulatory loop a core mechanism of allostasis and mental stability. It also implies an inherent vulnerability of conative organisms to affective dysregulation. Accordingly, much of psychopathology may be considered as compromised conative inference, which could be a target for therapeutic intervention.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42601581What 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.