4.5 Article

Bidirectional Associations Between Stress and Reward Processing in Children and Adolescents: A Longitudinal Neuroimaging Study

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2019.05.012

关键词

Children; Depression; Imaging; Longitudinal; Reward; Stress

资金

  1. National Institute of Mental Health Intramural Research Program [ZIAMH002782]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MENTAL HEALTH [ZIAMH002957] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: Aberrations in both neural reward processing and stress reactivity are associated with increased risk for mental illness; yet, how these two factors relate to each other remains unclear. Several studies suggest that stress exposure impacts reward function, thus increasing risk for psychopathology. However, the alternative hypothesis, in which reward dysfunction impacts stress reactivity, has been rarely examined. The current study aimed to test both hypotheses using a longitudinal design. METHODS: Participants were 38 children (23 girls; 61 %) from a prospective cohort study. A standard stress-exposure measure was collected at 7 years of age. Children performed a well-validated imaging reward paradigm at age 10, and a standardized acute psychological stress laboratory protocol was administered both at age 10 and at age 13. Structural equation modeling was used to examine bidirectional associations between stress and neural response to reward anticipation. RESULTS: Higher exposure to stressful life events at age 7 predicted lower neural response to reward anticipation in regions of the basal ganglia at age 10, which included ventral caudate, nucleus accumbens, putamen, and globus pallidus. Lower response to reward anticipation in medial prefrontal and anterior cingulate cortex predicted higher stress reactivity at age 13. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings provide support for bidirectional associations between stress and reward processing, in that stress may impact reward anticipation, but also in that reduced reward anticipation may increase susceptibility to stress.

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