4.2 Article

Decreased ventral anterior cingulate cortex activity is associated with reduced social pain during emotional support

期刊

SOCIAL NEUROSCIENCE
卷 4, 期 5, 页码 443-454

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/17470910902955884

关键词

Social exclusion; Emotional support; Anterior cingulate cortex; Prefrontal cortex; fMRI

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [19203030, 20790843]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

People feel psychological pain when they are excluded, and this pain is often attenuated when emotional support is received. It is therefore likely that a specific neural mechanism underlies the detection of social exclusion. Similarly, specific neural mechanisms may underlie the beneficial effects of emotional support. Although neuroimaging researchers have recently examined the neural basis of social pain, there is presently no agreement as to which part of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) is involved in the perception and modulation of social pain. We hypothesized that activity in those brain regions that are associated with social pain would be correlated with decrements in social pain induced by emotional support. To examine the effects of emotional support on social pain caused by exclusion, we conducted an fMRI study in which participants played a virtual ball-tossing game. Participants were initially included and later excluded from the game. In the latter half of the session from which participants were excluded, participants received emotionally supportive text messages. We found that emotional support led to increased activity in the left lateral/medial prefrontal cortices and some temporal regions. Those individuals who experienced greater attenuation of social pain exhibited lower ventral ACC and higher left lateral prefrontal cortex activation. These results suggest that the ventral ACC underlies social pain, and that emotional support enhances prefrontal cortex activity, which in turn may lead to a weakened affective response.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据