PreprintCited by 30Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesStress Responses and Cortisol

Low lifetime stress exposure is associated with reduced stimulus-response memory

Open access
Goldfarb, Elizabeth V., Shields, Grant S., Daw, Nathaniel D., Slavich, George M., Phelps, Elizabeth A.·2017·Learning & Memory

Abstract

Exposure to stress throughout life can cumulatively influence later health, even among young adults. The negative effects of high cumulative stress exposure are well-known, and a shift from episodic to stimulus-response memory has been proposed to underlie forms of psychopathology that are related to high lifetime stress. At the other extreme, effects of very low stress exposure are mixed, with some studies reporting that low stress leads to better outcomes, while others demonstrate that low stress is associated with diminished resilience and negative outcomes. However, the influence of very low lifetime stress exposure on episodic and stimulus-response memory is unknown. Here we use a lifetime stress assessment system (STRAIN) to assess cumulative lifetime stress exposure and measure memory performance in young adults reporting very low and moderate levels of lifetime stress exposure. Relative to moderate levels of stress, very low levels of lifetime stress were associated with reduced use and retention (24 h later) of stimulus-response (SR) associations, and a higher likelihood of using context memory. Further, computational modeling revealed that participants with low levels of stress exhibited worse expression of memory for SR associations than those with moderate stress. These results demonstrate that very low levels of stress exposure can have negative effects on cognition.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1101/lm.045179.117

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Cumulative life stress measured with the STRAIN has been associated with worse health, including poor self-reported physical health, impaired cognitive functioning, and greater cancer-related depression and fatigue.

    “Cumulative life stress measured with the STRAIN has so far been associated with worse health, including poor self-reported physical health (Toussaint et al., 2016), impaired cognitive functioning (Goldfarb et al., 2017; Shields et al., 2017), and greater cancer-related depression and fatigue (Bower et al., 2014; Dooley et al., 2017).”

    From More than a feeling: A unified view of stress measurement for population science (2018) · cites this paper as Goldfarb et al., 2017

  • The STRAIN predicts biological reactivity to acute stress, metabolic function, memory, diurnal cortisol levels in women diagnosed with ovarian cancer, depression and fatigue in women diagnosed with breast cancer, and self-reported mental and physical health in the general population.

    “This approach yielded eight preliminary studies, showing that the STRAIN predicts biological reactivity to acute stress (27), metabolic function (28), memory (29), diurnal cortisol levels in women diagnosed with ovarian cancer (30), depression and fatigue in women diagnosed with breast cancer (31,32), and self-reported mental and physical health in the general population (33,34).”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Goldfarb, E. V., Shields, G. S., Daw, N. D., Slavich, G. M., & Phelps, E. A.
Affiliations
  • New York University (US)
  • University of California, Davis (US)
  • Princeton University (US)
  • University of California, Los Angeles (US)
  • Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
Venue
Learning & Memory
Published
2017-03-15
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
162-168
ISSN
  • 1072-0502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-5485
OpenAlex
W2597979263
Cited by
30
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Learning & Memory (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HighWire Press Open Archive (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH097085, K08MH103443)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
low stress, episodic memory, contextual memory, memory retention, memory expression, computational model of memory, young adults
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Association Learning, Attention, Cognition, Computer Simulation, Cues, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Memory, Models, Psychological, Photic Stimulation, Stress, Psychological, Young Adult

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