ArticleNPJ science of learning2024
Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions.
Article in NPJ science of learning, 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.
- Sex differences in resting-state hypothalamic connectivity and its relationship with negative emotion and behavior measures in young adults.Brain structure & function · 2026Article
- Reduced Pavlovian Value Updating Alters Decision-Making in Sign-Trackers.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2026Article
- Toward a Translational Model of Sex-Associated Pavlovian Phenotypes.Addiction biology · 2025Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Motivational (i.e., appetitive or aversive) cues can bias value-based decisions by affecting either direction and intensity of instrumental actions. Despite several findings describing important interindividual differences in these biases, whether biological sex can also play a role is still up to debate. By comparing females and males in both appetitive and aversive Pavlovian-to-Instrumental Transfer paradigms we found that, while motivational cues similarly bias the direction of instrumental actions in both sexes, the intensity of such actions is increased by the cue in male participants only. The present results constitute compelling evidence that a crucial motivational bias of daily actions directed to obtaining rewards or avoiding punishments is modulated by biological sex. This evidence sheds new light on the role of sex in motivational processes that underlie decision-making, highlighting the importance of considering sex as a crucial factor in future research on this topic.
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.