Cited by 178Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional DevelopmentNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorChild Abuse and Trauma

Early parental care is important for hippocampal maturation: Evidence from brain morphology in humans

Open access
Rao, Hengyi, Betancourt, Laura, Giannetta, Joan M., Brodsky, Nancy L., Korczykowski, Marc, Avants, Brian B., Gee, James C., Wang, Jiongjiong +3 more·2010·NeuroImage

Abstract

The effects of early life experience on later brain structure and function have been studied extensively in animals, yet the relationship between childhood experience and normal brain development in humans remains largely unknown. Using a unique longitudinal data set including ecologically valid in-home measures of early experience during childhood (at age 4 and 8 years) and high-resolution structural brain imaging during adolescence (mean age 14 years), we examined the effects on later brain morphology of two dimensions of early experience: parental nurturance and environmental stimulation. Parental nurturance at age 4 predicts the volume of the left hippocampus in adolescence, with better nurturance associated with smaller hippocampal volume. In contrast, environmental stimulation did not correlate with hippocampal volume. Moreover, the association between hippocampal volume and parental nurturance disappears at age 8, supporting the existence of a sensitive developmental period for brain maturation. These findings indicate that variation in normal childhood experience is associated with differences in brain morphology, and hippocampal volume is specifically associated with early parental nurturance. Our results provide neuroimaging evidence supporting the important role of warm parental care during early childhood for brain maturation.

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.neuroimage.2009.07.003

Cites

56 of 56 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?

  • It is possible that certain children respond more strongly to one type of caregiver input than to the other.

    “Given that separate neurobiological systems may support receptivity to emotional versus cognitive input (Avants et al., 2015; Rao et al., 2010), it is possible that some children are especially sensitive to one dimension of caregiver input but not the other.”
  • In adolescence, early emotional input has been linked to memory and hippocampal volume, while early cognitive input has been linked to language and cortical thickness.

    “early emotional input was associated with memory functioning and hippocampal volume in adolescence, whereas cognitive input was associated with language development and cortical thickness (Avants et al., 2015; Farah et al., 2008; Rao et al., 2010).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rao, H., Betancourt, L., Giannetta, J. M., Brodsky, N. L., Korczykowski, M., Avants, B. B., Gee, J. C., Wang, J., Hurt, H., Detre, J. A., & Farah, M. J.
Affiliations
  • Sun Yat-sen University (CN)
  • University of Pennsylvania (US)
  • Children's Hospital of Philadelphia (US)
Corresponding author
  • Rao, Hengyi
  • Farah, Martha J.
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-01
Volume
49
Issue
1
Pages
1144-1150
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2117517075
Cited by
178
References
56
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 20
FWCI
11.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Sun Yat-sen University
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA014129, DA-015149, R01DA015149, R01DA014129)
  • National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (P30NS045839)
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD043078, R01HD055689, HD055689)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
Keywords
parental nurturance, hippocampal volume, hippocampal maturation, brain structure, environmental stimulation, sensitive period, childhood experiences, adolescence, brain development, home-based assessment
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Aging, Black or African American, Brain, Child, Child Abuse, Child, Preschool, Environment, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Parents

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