4.5 Article

Temporal dynamics of spontaneous default-mode network activity mediate the association between reappraisal and depression

期刊

SOCIAL COGNITIVE AND AFFECTIVE NEUROSCIENCE
卷 13, 期 12, 页码 1235-1247

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/scan/nsy092

关键词

emotion regulation; reappraisal; default mode network; Hurst; depression

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [30870668, 81273674]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Cognitive reappraisal is associated with major depressive disorder (MDD), while spontaneous activity patterns of the default mode network (DMN) is implicated in reappraisal and MDD. However, neural mechanisms subserving the close association of spontaneous reappraisal and depression are unclear. Spontaneous reappraisal, depression and resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging were measured from 105 healthy subjects. We assessed the temporal complexity (Hurst exponent), Regional Homogeneity (ReHo) and fractional Amplitude of Low Frequency Fluctuation (fALFF) profiles of DMN, a network involved in both reappraisal and depression. Mediation effects of these standard measures on the relationship between reappraisal and depression, and the contributions of each DMN subregion, were assessed. Results indicated that Hurst exponent (H) of DMN, whether extracted by independent component analysis or region of interest, was significantly associated with reappraisal scores. An individual with a higher reappraisal score has a lower Hurst value of DMN. Mediation analyses suggest that H of DMN partially mediates the association between reappraisal and the degree of depression, and this mediation effect arises from the contribution of medial prefrontal cortex. Neither ReHo nor fALFF showed a similar correlation or mediation effect. These findings suggest that temporal dynamics of DMN play an important role in emotion regulation and its association with depression. H of DMN may serve as a neural marker mediating the association between reappraisal and depression.

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

4.5
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