Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
npj Science of Learning
Published
2024-10-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-024-00246-6
Citations
5
Primary Topic
Behavioral Health and Interventions
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
2.05

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions

Sara Garofalo, Gianluca Finotti, Luigi Degni, Francesca Starita et al.
5 citations
npj Science of Learning
Behavioral Health and Interventions
2.05
article

Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions

Sara Garofalo, Gianluca Finotti, Luigi Degni, Francesca Starita, Giuseppe di Pellegrino, Trevor William Robbins
article en
5 citations

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.

npj Science of LearningVol. 9(1)
Università di Camerino (IT), University of Cambridge (GB), University of Bologna (IT)
Fundação Bial
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 12%
Behavioral Health and Interventions
2.05
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Sex differences in motivational biases over instrumental actions — Sara Garofalo, Gianluca Finotti, et al. · npj Science of Learning (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS