4.4 Article

Caregiving influences on emotional learning and regulation: applying a sensitive period model

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Volume 36, Issue -, Pages 177-184

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.11.003

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director's Early Independence Award [DP5OD021370]
  2. Brain & Behavior Research Foundation (National Alliance for Research on Schizophrenia and Depression
  3. NARSAD) Young Investigator Award
  4. Jacobs Foundation Early Career Research Fellowship
  5. Society for Clinical Child and Adolescent Psychology (Division 53 of the American Psychological Association) Richard 'Dick' Abidin Early Career Award and Grant

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Early caregiving experiences play a central role in shaping corticolimbic development and emotional learning and regulation. Given dynamic changes in corticolimbic maturation, the effects of caregiving experiences are likely to depend on the developmental timing of exposure. Cross-species evidence has identified timing-related differences in the effects of caregiving adversity. However, the extent to which developmental differences in associations between caregiving adversity and corticolimbic circuitry align with a sensitive period model has remained unclear. Converging evidence from studies of caregiver deprivation points to a sensitive period for caregiving influences on corticolimbic circuitry and emotional development during infancy. By contrast, differential associations between maltreatment and corticolimbic circuitry at specific ages in childhood and adolescence may reflect experience-dependent mechanisms of plasticity. Delineating sensitive periods of development and the precise experience related mechanisms by which caregiving experiences influence corticolimbic development is essential for refining conceptual models and understanding risk and resilience following early adversity.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available