Welcome to the new version of CaltechAUTHORS. Login is currently restricted to library staff. If you notice any issues, please email coda@library.caltech.edu
Published May 2021 | Published + Supplemental Material + Submitted
Journal Article Open

How biopsychosocial depressive risk shapes behavioral and neural responses to social evaluation in adolescence

Abstract

Introduction: Understanding the emotional responsivity style and neurocognitive profiles of depression‐related processes in at‐risk youth may be helpful in revealing those most likely to develop affective disorders. However, the multiplicity of biopsychosocial risk factors makes it difficult to disentangle unique and combined effects at a neurobiological level. Methods: In a population‐derived sample of 56 older adolescents (aged 17–20), we adopted partial least squares regression and correlation models to explore the relationships between multivariate biopsychosocial risks for later depression, emotional response style, and fMRI activity, to rejecting and inclusive social feedback. Results: Behaviorally, higher depressive risk was associated with both reduced negative affect following negative social feedback and reduced positive affect following positive social feedback. In response to both cues of rejection and inclusion, we observed a general neural pattern of increased cingulate, temporal, and striatal activity in the brain. Secondly, in response to rejection only, we observed a pattern of activity in ostensibly executive control‐ and emotion regulation‐related brain regions encompassing fronto‐parietal brain networks including the angular gyrus. Conclusion: The results suggest that risk for depression is associated with a pervasive emotional insensitivity in the face of positive and negative social feedback.

Additional Information

© 2021 The Authors. Brain and Behavior published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Issue Online: 13 May 2021; Version of Record online: 04 March 2021; Manuscript accepted: 28 November 2020; Manuscript revised: 27 November 2020; Manuscript received: 31 March 2020. The authors gratefully thank colleagues at the Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge and the MRC Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit, Cambridge for help during this work. This work was supported by grants from Friends of Peterhouse Medical Fund Cambridge (RG 51114), the Wellcome Trust (RG 074296), and the UK Medical Research Council (MC US A060 0019). Author Contributions: TD, IG, DM, and NW devised the study. NW and SS collected the data. JS, ML, and ALvH analyzed the data. JS and TD wrote the paper. All authors report no biomedical financial interests or potential conflict of interests. Peer Review: The peer review history for this article is available at https://publons.com/publon/10.1002/brb3.2005. Data Availability Statement: The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Attached Files

Published - brb3.2005.pdf

Submitted - Manuscript.docx

Supplemental Material - brb32005-sup-0001-supinfo.docx

Files

brb3.2005.pdf
Files (1.8 MB)
Name Size Download all
md5:b8bd788b9400cc917fcd8f4f36fdaa31
149.5 kB Download
md5:83d6daf611b7ac03bd2d0be7a698c29c
726.8 kB Preview Download
md5:80c2830ef4046132109e43146f7ac9d8
917.3 kB Download

Additional details

Created:
August 22, 2023
Modified:
October 23, 2023