Cited by 838Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

The structural and functional connectivity of the amygdala: from normal emotion to pathological anxiety

Open access
Kim, M. Justin, Loucks, Rebecca A., Palmer, Amy L., Brown, Annemarie C., Solomon, Kimberly M., Marchante, Ashley N., Whalen, Paul J.·2011·Behavioural Brain Research

Abstract

The dynamic interactions between the amygdala and the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) are usefully conceptualized as a circuit that both allows us to react automatically to biologically relevant predictive stimuli as well as regulate these reactions when the situation calls for it. In this review, we will begin by discussing the role of this amygdala-mPFC circuitry in the conditioning and extinction of aversive learning in animals. We will then relate these data to emotional regulation paradigms in humans. Finally, we will consider how these processes are compromised in normal and pathological anxiety. We conclude that the capacity for efficient crosstalk between the amygdala and the mPFC, which is represented as the strength of the amygdala-mPFC circuitry, is crucial to beneficial outcomes in terms of reported anxiety.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.bbr.2011.04.025

Cites

132 of 132 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The dominant neurobiological model of anxiety disorders proposes that amygdala hyperreactivity corresponds to heightened emotional reactivity, while disrupted prefrontal processing corresponds to impaired emotion regulation.

    “The prevailing neurobiological model of anxiety disorders posits that amygdala hyperreactivity to fearful or threatening stimuli is associated with heightened emotional reactivity, while disrupted processing in prefrontal regions is linked to impairments in emotional regulation (Berkman and Lieberman, 2009; Freitas-Ferrari et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2011).”
  • Earlier research has shown that people with social anxiety disorder have heightened amygdala reactivity and altered prefrontal responses to social cues.

    “Previous work has demonstrated amygdala hyperreactivity and disrupted prefrontal responses to social cues in individuals with SAD (Kim et al., 2011).”
  • At the neurobiological level, social anxiety disorder involves disrupted activity in the neural circuitry for emotion regulation.

    “Social anxiety disorder (SAD) is characterized at a neurobiological level by disrupted activity in emotion regulation neural circuitry.”
  • Compared with healthy individuals, patients with social anxiety disorder show disrupted activation in the amygdala and prefrontal cortex.

    “patients with SAD show: i) disrupted activation in the amygdala and regions of the prefrontal cortex (for reviews, see Berkman and Lieberman, 2009; Freitas-Ferrari et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2011)”
  • Task fMRI work suggests vmPFC top-down regulation of amygdala, and amygdala-vmPFC coupling relates to trait anxiety in task and resting studies.

    “task-based fMRI studies of emotion regulation suggest that the vmPFC is involved in top-down regulation of the amygdala, and functional coupling of the amygdala and vmPFC is related to trait anxiety in both task-related and resting-state studies13,14,15.”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [47]Holstege G Bandler R Saper CB The emotional motor system Prog Brain Res 1996 107 3 6 8782510

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kim, M. J., Loucks, R. A., Palmer, A. L., Brown, A. C., Solomon, K. M., Marchante, A. N., & Whalen, P. J.
Affiliations
Dartmouth College (US)
Corresponding author
Kim, M. Justin
Venue
Behavioural Brain Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-10
Volume
223
Issue
2
Pages
403-410
ISSN
0166-4328 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126054880
Cited by
838
References
132
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 43 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 43 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 54 · 2020: 65 · 2019: 65 · 2018: 80 · 2017: 65 · 2016: 88 · 2015: 70 · 2014: 65 · 2013: 60 · 2012: 36
FWCI
4.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Behavioural Brain Research (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH080716, F31MH090672)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex, anxiety, emotion regulation, fear conditioning, fear extinction, aversive learning, structural connectivity, functional connectivity
MeSH terms
Amygdala, Anxiety Disorders, Conditioning, Psychological, Emotions, Extinction, Psychological, Facial Expression, Fear, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neural Pathways, Social Environment, Stress Disorders, Post-Traumatic, Prefrontal Cortex

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review