4.2 Article

Callous-Unemotional Traits Modulate Brain Drug Craving Response in High-Risk Young Offenders

期刊

JOURNAL OF ABNORMAL CHILD PSYCHOLOGY
卷 46, 期 5, 页码 993-1009

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10802-017-0364-8

关键词

Delinquency; Psychopathic traits; Drug abuse; Craving; cocaine; Brain imaging

资金

  1. National Institute of Drug Abuse (NIDA) [K01 DA026502]
  2. National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) [R01 MH071896]
  3. National Institute of Child Health and Development (NICHD) [R01 HD082257-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Adults with psychopathy have a high propensity for substance abuse, generally starting from a young age. This investigation tested hypotheses about differences in the neural responses associated with drug craving among high-risk young offenders with histories of abuse of stimulants and other drugs as a function of psychopathic traits. Fifty-four male adolescents (44 with a history of stimulant abuse and 10 controls) incarcerated at a maximum-security facility (M age = 17.08 years) completed a drug-cue exposure task while brain hemodynamic activity was monitored using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) with a mobile MRI scanner stationed at the facility. Psychopathic traits were assessed using the Hare Psychopathy Checklist: Youth Version (PCL:YV). In the stimulant abuser group, drug cues elicited activity in classic reward circuitry. Consistent with studies of adult psychopathic traits and substance abuse, there was a negative association between PCL-YV scores and hemodynamic response related to drug craving in the amygdala and ACC in youth with a history of stimulant abuse. However, there were considerably more negative associations between the PCL:YV and hemodynamic response among youth than adults and this was primarily due to callous-unemotional traits rather than interpersonal or behavioral traits. The implications for how personality traits modulate motivations for drug-seeking behavior among adolescent offenders are discussed.

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