In an appetitive PIT transfer phase, motivational cues speed responding (intensity bias) in males only; females show no intensity bias¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2024 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i3 The CS by sex interaction on reaction times was significant with moderate Bayesian support, indicating a sex-selective intensity bias with a large effect (ηp2 = 0.18). → Luigi A. E. Degni 2024
q3 i? Only males showed faster reaction times to CS+ than CS−, while females showed no reaction-time difference between cues. → Luigi A. E. Degni 2024
Evidence¶
Luigi A. E. Degni 2024¶
Luigi A. E. Degni, Sara Garofalo, Gianluca Finotti, Francesca Starita, Trevor W. Robbins & Giuseppe di Pellegrino. (2024). Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00246-6
q3 · i3 · causal · r2
Experiment 1 tested the intensity bias with a 2x2 mixed ANOVA on reaction times (n = 42; reaction times for a sample of 35 due to technical problems); the CS by sex interaction was significant (F1,40 = 8.61; p = 0.01; BF10 = 7.46) with printed effect size ηp2 = 0.18, with "only males showed faster reaction times to the CS+."
"More specifically, only males showed faster reaction times to the CS + (M = 692.13; SD = 72.1) compared with the CS − (M = 731.47; SD = 92.63), while females did not report differences in reaction times between CS + (M = 743.57; SD = 60.95) and CS − (M = 736.45; SD = 69.4)."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- In an appetitive PIT transfer phase, both males and females show a direction bias, choosing cue-congruent responses more than incongruent ones, with no sex difference — related
- In an aversive PIT paradigm, the intensity bias (stronger grip force) is again present in males but not females, showing the sex difference is valence-independent — related
- The direction bias is absent of sex modulation in the aversive PIT context as well, with no male-female difference in direction bias — related
- Sex differences in the intensity bias emerge despite comparable baseline liking, wanting, hunger, and instrumental learning between males and females — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
status |
review |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-26 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.