1
|
Forbes PA, Nitschke JP, Hochmeister N, Kalenscher T, Lamm C. No effects of acute stress on monetary delay discounting: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Neurobiol Stress 2024; 31:100653. [PMID: 38933285 PMCID: PMC11201353 DOI: 10.1016/j.ynstr.2024.100653] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/19/2023] [Revised: 05/06/2024] [Accepted: 05/30/2024] [Indexed: 06/28/2024] Open
Abstract
Many everyday decisions, including those concerning our health, finances and the environment, involve choosing between a smaller but imminent reward (e.g., €20 now) and a later but larger reward (e.g., €40 in a month). The extent to which an individual prefers smaller imminent rewards over larger delayed rewards can be measured using delay discounting tasks. Acute stress induces a cascade of biological and psychological responses with potential consequences for how individuals think about the future, process rewards, and make decisions, all of which can impact delay discounting. Several studies have shown that individuals focus more on imminent rewards under stress. These findings have been used to explain why individuals make detrimental choices under acute stress. Yet, the evidence linking acute stress to delay discounting is equivocal. To address this uncertainty, we conducted a meta-analysis of 11 studies (14 effects) to systematically quantify the effects of acute stress on monetary delay discounting. Overall, we find no effect of acute stress on delay discounting, compared to control conditions (SMD = -0.18, 95% CI [-0.57, 0.20], p = 0.32). We also find that neither the gender/sex of the participants, the type of stressor (e.g., physical vs. psychosocial) nor whether monetary decisions were hypothetical or incentivized (i.e. monetary decisions were actually paid out) moderated the impact of acute stress on monetary delay discounting. We argue that establishing the effects of acute stress on the separate processes involved in delay discounting, such as reward valuation and prospection, will help to resolve the inconsistencies in the field.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul A.G. Forbes
- Comparative Psychology, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Germany
- Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Jonas P. Nitschke
- Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Nicole Hochmeister
- Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria
| | - Tobias Kalenscher
- Comparative Psychology, Institute of Experimental Psychology, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Claus Lamm
- Social, Cognitive, and Affective Neuroscience Unit, Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of Vienna, Austria
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Forbes PAG, Aydogan G, Braunstein J, Todorova B, Wagner IC, Lockwood PL, Apps MAJ, Ruff CC, Lamm C. Acute stress reduces effortful prosocial behaviour. eLife 2024; 12:RP87271. [PMID: 38180785 PMCID: PMC10942768 DOI: 10.7554/elife.87271] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/06/2024] Open
Abstract
Acute stress can change our cognition and emotions, but what specific consequences this has for human prosocial behaviour is unclear. Previous studies have mainly investigated prosociality with financial transfers in economic games and produced conflicting results. Yet a core feature of many types of prosocial behaviour is that they are effortful. We therefore examined how acute stress changes our willingness to exert effort that benefits others. Healthy male participants - half of whom were put under acute stress - made decisions whether to exert physical effort to gain money for themselves or another person. With this design, we could independently assess the effects of acute stress on prosocial, compared to self-benefitting, effortful behaviour. Compared to controls (n = 45), participants in the stress group (n = 46) chose to exert effort more often for self- than for other-benefitting rewards at a low level of effort. Additionally, the adverse effects of stress on prosocial effort were particularly pronounced in more selfish participants. Neuroimaging combined with computational modelling revealed a putative neural mechanism underlying these effects: more stressed participants showed increased activation to subjective value in the dorsal anterior cingulate cortex and anterior insula when they themselves could benefit from their exerted effort relative to when someone else could. By using an effort-based task that better approximates real-life prosocial behaviour and incorporating trait differences in prosocial tendencies, our study provides important insights into how acute stress affects prosociality and its associated neural mechanisms.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paul AG Forbes
- Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Gökhan Aydogan
- Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
| | - Julia Braunstein
- Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of ViennaViennaAustria
- Vienna Cognitive Science Hub, University of ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Boryana Todorova
- Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Isabella C Wagner
- Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of ViennaViennaAustria
- Vienna Cognitive Science Hub, University of ViennaViennaAustria
- Centre for Microbiology and Environmental Systems Science, University of ViennaViennaAustria
| | - Patricia L Lockwood
- Centre for Human Brain Health, Institute of Mental Health and School of Psychology, University of BirminghamBirminghamUnited Kingdom
- Institute for Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of BirminghamBirminghamUnited Kingdom
| | - Matthew AJ Apps
- Centre for Human Brain Health, Institute of Mental Health and School of Psychology, University of BirminghamBirminghamUnited Kingdom
- Institute for Mental Health, School of Psychology, University of BirminghamBirminghamUnited Kingdom
| | - Christian C Ruff
- Zurich Center for Neuroeconomics, Department of Economics, University of ZurichZurichSwitzerland
| | - Claus Lamm
- Department of Cognition, Emotion, and Methods in Psychology, Faculty of Psychology, University of ViennaViennaAustria
- Vienna Cognitive Science Hub, University of ViennaViennaAustria
| |
Collapse
|