Cited by 96Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Sex moderates the association between symptoms of anxiety, but not obsessive compulsive disorder, and error-monitoring brain activity: a meta-analytic review

Moser, Jason S., Moran, Tim P., Kneip, Chelsea, Schroder, Hans S., Larson, Michael J.·2016·Psychophysiology

Abstract

Sex differences in cognition and emotion are particularly active areas of research. Much of this work, however, focuses on mean-level differences between the sexes on cognitive and/or emotional variables in isolation. In this article, we are primarily concerned with how sex affects associations between cognition and emotion, or cognition-emotion interactions. Specifically, the purpose of this paper is to shed light on a gap in our understanding of how sex affects the relationship between error monitoring, a core component of cognitive control, and anxiety. Using meta-analysis, we show that the relationship between symptoms of anxiety and a neurophysiological marker of error monitoring-the error-related negativity (ERN)-is significantly greater in women than men such that women, but not men, with higher levels of anxiety show a larger ERN. This sex difference held true across studies of anxiety-specific symptoms but not studies of obsessive-compulsive symptoms. These findings underscore the need to consider sex in studies of anxiety and the ERN as well as support growing evidence indicating that obsessive-compulsive problems are distinguishable from other anxiety-specific problems across multiple levels of analysis. Overall, we conclude that ignoring sex in studies of cognition-emotion interactions is unacceptable. Rather, future research that continues to tackle questions related to sex differences in associations between cognition and emotion will more likely lead to advancements in basic and applied sciences of relevance to health and human behavior.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/psyp.12509

Cites

79 of 79 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
Moser, J. S., Moran, T. P., Kneip, C., Schroder, H. S., & Larson, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Brigham Young University (US)
Corresponding author
Moser, Jason S.
Venue
Psychophysiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-12-17
Volume
53
Issue
1
Pages
21-29
ISSN
  • 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8986
OpenAlex
W2217911164
Cited by
96
References
78
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 1
FWCI
0.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (HD065879, K12HD065879)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
sex differences, anxiety symptoms, obsessive-compulsive symptoms, error monitoring, error-related negativity, cognitive control, emotion and cognition, women
MeSH terms
Anxiety, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Male, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Sex Characteristics, Executive Function

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