Cited by 274Stress Responses and CortisolAdrenal Hormones and DisordersNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior

Sex differences in salivary cortisol reactivity to the trier social stress test (TSST): a meta-analysis

Liu, Jenny J.W., Ein, Natalie, Peck, Katlyn, Huang, Vivian, Pruessner, Jens C., Vickers, Kristin·2017·Psychoneuroendocrinology

Abstract

Some, but not all studies using the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) have demonstrated evidence in support of sex differences in salivary cortisol. The aim of the current meta-analysis is to examine sex differences in salivary cortisol following exposure to the TSST. We further explored the effects of modifications to the TSST protocol and procedural variations as potential moderators. We searched articles published from January, 1993 to February, 2016 in MedLine, PsychINFO, and ProQuest Theses and Dissertations. This meta-analysis is based on 34 studies, with a total sample size of 1350 individuals (640 women and 710 men). Using a random effects model, we found significant heterogeneity in salivary cortisol output across sexes, such that men were observed to have higher cortisol values at peak and recovery following the TSST compared to women. Modifications to the sampling trajectory of cortisol (i.e., duration of acclimation, peak sampling time, and duration of recovery) significantly moderated the heterogeneity across both sexes. Further, there are observed sex differences at various time points of the reactive cortisol following the TSST. Lastly, current results suggest that these sex differences can be, at least in part, attributed to variations in methodological considerations across studies. Future research could advance this line of inquiry by using other methods of analyses (e.g., area under the curve; AUC), in order to better understand the effects of methodological variations and their implications for research design.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.psyneuen.2017.04.007

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Liu, J. J. W., Ein, N., Peck, K., Huang, V., Pruessner, J. C., & Vickers, K.
Affiliations
  • Toronto Metropolitan University (CA)
  • McGill University (CA)
Corresponding author
Vickers, Kristin
Venue
Psychoneuroendocrinology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2017-08
Volume
82
Pages
26-37
ISSN
0306-4530 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2609584573
Cited by
274
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 29 · 2025: 36 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 34 · 2021: 42 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 26 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 2
FWCI
2.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychoneuroendocrinology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Adrenal Hormones and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Keywords
sex differences, salivary cortisol, Trier Social Stress Test, social stress, cortisol response, stress response, methodological variability
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Exercise Test, Female, Humans, Hydrocortisone, Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System, Male, Middle Aged, Pituitary-Adrenal System, Saliva, Sex Characteristics, Sex Factors, Stress, Psychological, Reproducibility of Results

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review