4.7 Article

Body mass correlates inversely with inhibitory control in response to food among adolescent girls: An fMRI study

Journal

NEUROIMAGE
Volume 52, Issue 4, Pages 1696-1703

Publisher

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2010.05.059

Keywords

Obesity; BMI; Go/no-go; Response inhibition; Impulsivity; fMRI

Funding

  1. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [R01MH064560] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Self-report and behavioral data suggest that impulsivity may contribute to the development and maintenance of obesity. Neuroimaging studies implicate a widespread neural network in inhibitory control and suggest that impulsive individuals show hypoactivity in these regions during tasks requiring response inhibition. Yet, research has not directly tested whether body mass correlates inversely with activation of these regions during response inhibition tasks. The present study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate neural activations during a food-specific go/no-go task in adolescent girls ranging from lean to obese. When required to inhibit prepotent responses to appetizing food, body mass index (BMI) correlated with response inhibition at both the behavioral and neural levels, with more overweight adolescents showing greater behavioral evidence of impulsivity as well as reduced activation of frontal inhibitory regions, including superior frontal gyrus, middle frontal gyrus, ventrolateral prefrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, and orbitofrontal cortex, than leaner individuals. As well, activation in food reward regions (e.g., temporal operculum/insula) in response to food images correlated positively with BMI. Results suggest that hypofunctioning of inhibitory control regions and increased response of food reward regions are related to elevated weight. (C) 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available