## 5 Conclusions and Limitation  
In this study, we examined the neural activation patterns during stress-inducing and post-stress recovery states in individuals classified into moderate- and high-stress groups using the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS). Our findings highlighted distinct differences in brain activation between the two groups. Under stress-inducing conditions, the moderate-stress group exhibited a greater number of activated voxels in the occipital, frontal, and limbic lobes, while the high-stress group showed predominant activation in the parietal lobe, particularly the left precuneus. During the recovery phase, these activation patterns shifted, with the high-stress group displaying more extensive voxel activation in the occipital and frontal lobes, suggesting heightened cognitive and emotional processing during recovery. Conversely, the moderate-stress group showed characteristic activation in the cerebellum, specifically the declive, implying distinct strategies for managing stress recovery. The activation of specific brain regions, such as the anterior cingulate, prefrontal cortex, and parahippocampal gyrus, underscores their pivotal roles in emotional regulation, cognitive processing, and memory functions during stress and recovery. These findings suggest that the intensity and manner of stress responses can influence the brain's engagement in recovery processes. These data indicate that individuals with higher perceived stress may require more cognitive resources for emotional regulation, potentially impacting their recovery strategies. The results of this study provide insight into the neural responses to stress and stress recovery, particularly in individuals with different levels of stress resilience. The activation of specific brain regions in response to stress and recovery highlights the importance of these regions in the regulation of stress responses and recovery. The findings of this study can be applied to the development of interventions or therapies aimed at improving stress resilience and promoting stress recovery. For example, targeting the specific activated brain regions identified in this study may be effective in reducing stress and promoting recovery in individuals with different levels of stress resilience. Despite the insights gained from this study, several limitations should be acknowledged. First, the sample size, while sufficient for the current analysis, may limit the generalizability of the findings to the broader population. Future research with larger and more diverse participant groups is needed to strengthen the validity of these results. Second, the use of the Perceived Stress Scale (PSS) as the sole measure for stress classification, while widely accepted, is inherently subjective and may not capture the full complexity of an individual's stress experience. Including objective stress biomarkers in future studies, such as cortisol levels, could provide a more comprehensive understanding of stress-related brain activation. Third, the cross-sectional design of this study restricts the ability to make causal inferences about the relationship between stress and brain activation. Longitudinal studies could offer more insights into how brain activation patterns change over time in response to varying stress levels. Additionally, the absence of significant activations in key subcortical regions like the amygdala and hippocampus may reflect limitations in spatial resolution, highlighting the need for targeted analyses in future research. Lastly, although efforts were made to control for potential confounding factors such as sleep patterns, diet, and physical activity, other unmeasured variables could have influenced the results. Addressing these limitations in future research will help to further clarify the neural mechanisms underlying stress and recovery. Future research in this area could further investigate the neural mechanisms involved in stress and recovery among individuals with different levels of stress resilience.