Cited by 143Tactile and Sensory InteractionsInfant Health and DevelopmentNeuroscience and Music Perception

Affective and non-affective touch evoke differential brain responses in 2-month-old infants

Open access
Jönsson, Emma H., Kotilahti, Kalle, Heiskala, Juha, Wasling, Helena Backlund, Olausson, Håkan, Croy, Ilona, Mustaniemi, Hanna, Hiltunen, Petri +5 more·2018·NeuroImage

Abstract

Caressing touch is an effective way to communicate emotions and to create social bonds. It is also one of the key mediators of early parental bonding. The caresses are generally thought to represent a social form of touching and indeed, slow, gentle brushing is encoded in specialized peripheral nerve fibers, the C-tactile (CT) afferents. In adults, areas such as the posterior insula and superior temporal sulcus are activated by affective, slow stroking touch but not by fast stroking stimulation. However, whether these areas are activated in infants, after social tactile stimulation, is unknown. In this study, we compared the total hemoglobin responses measured with diffuse optical tomography (DOT) in the left hemisphere following slow and fast stroking touch stimulation in 16 2-month-old infants. We compared slow stroking (optimal CT afferent stimulation) to fast stroking (non-optimal CT stimulation). Activated regions were delineated using two methods: one based on contrast between the two conditions, and the other based on voxel-based statistical significance of the difference between the two conditions. The first method showed a single activation cluster in the temporal cortex with center of gravity in the middle temporal gyrus where the total hemoglobin increased after the slow stroking relative to the fast stroking (p = 0.04 uncorrected). The second method revealed a cluster in the insula with an increase in total hemoglobin in the insular cortex in response to slow stroking relative to fast stroking (p = 0.0005 uncorrected; p = 0.04 corrected for multiple comparisons). These activation clusters encompass areas that are involved in processing of affective, slow stroking touch in the adult brain. We conclude that the infant brain shows a pronounced and adult-like response to slow stroking touch compared to fast stroking touch in the insular cortex but the expected response in the primary somatosensory cortex was not found at this age. The results imply that emotionally valent touch is encoded in the brain in adult-like manner already soon after birth and this suggests a potential for involvement of touch in bonding with the caretaker.

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.2017.12.024

Cites

9 of 9 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?

  • Jönsson et al. (2018) found that slow stroking touch (similar to emotionally valent touch or caressing), but not fast touch, yielded neurological activations similar to activations in developed, adult brains.

    “Using diffuse optical tomography with 2-month-old infants, Jönsson et al. (2018) found that slow stroking touch (similar to emotionally valent touch or caressing), but not fast touch, yielded neurological activations similar to activations in developed, adult brains.”

    From The evolved nest, oxytocin functioning, and prosocial development (2023) · cites this paper as Jönsson et al. (2018)

  • Recent neuroimaging studies support the view that infants evolved for positive touch from the first months of life.

    “Recent neuroimaging studies support the view that infants evolved for positive touch from the first months of life.”

    From The evolved nest, oxytocin functioning, and prosocial development (2023) · cites this paper as Jönsson et al. (2018)

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: 7

  1. Cope, M., 1991. The Application of Near Infrared Spectroscopy to Non Invasive Monitoring of Cerebral Oxygenation in the Newborn Infant. PhD Thesis. University College London.
  2. Eyre, J.A., 1992. The Development of the Nervous System. In the Neurophysiological Examination of the Newborn Infant, pp. 1-9.
  3. Feldman, R., Rosenthal, Z., Eidelman, A.I., 2014. Maternal-preterm skin-to-skin contact enhances child physiologic organization and cognitive control across the first 10 years of life. Biol. Psychiatr. 75 (1), 56-64.
  4. Kotzberg, M.G., Chen, B.R., DeLeo, S.E., Bouchard, M.B., Hillman, E.M.C., 2013. Resolving the transition from negative to positive blood oxygen level-dependent responses in the developing brain. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 110, 4380-4385.
  5. Perini, I., Olausson, H., Morrison, I., 2015. Seeking pleasant touch: neural correlates of behavioral preferences for skin stroking, 2015 Feb 5 Front. Behav. Neurosci. 9, 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00008. eCollection 2015. · DOI
  6. Uvn€ as-Moberg, K., 2012. Short-term and long-term effects of oxytocin released by suckling and skin-to-skin contact in mothers and infants. In: Evolution, Early Experience and Human Development: from Research to Practice, pp. 299-306.
  7. Zeff, B.W., White, B.R., Dehghani, H., Schlaggar, B.L., Culver, J.P., 2007. Retinotopic mapping of adult human visual cortex with high-density diffuse optical tomography. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. Unit. States Am. 104, 12169-12174.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jönsson, E. H., Kotilahti, K., Heiskala, J., Wasling, H. B., Olausson, H., Croy, I., Mustaniemi, H., Hiltunen, P., Tuulari, J. J., Scheinin, N. M., Karlsson, L., Karlsson, H., & Nissilä, I.
Affiliations
  • University of Gothenburg (SE)
  • Aalto University (FI)
  • Helsinki University Hospital (FI)
  • Linköping University (SE)
  • University of Turku (FI)
Venue
NeuroImage
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-04
Volume
169
Pages
162-171
ISSN
1053-8119 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2773026318
Cited by
143
References
9
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 45 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 8
FWCI
11.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • NeuroImage (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aaltodoc (Aalto University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Jane ja Aatos Erkon Säätiö
  • Marianne and Marcus Wallenberg Foundation (MAW2014-009, MAW2015-009)
  • Academy of Finland (303937, 269282, 253270, 134950, 273451)
  • Signe ja Ane Gyllenbergin Säätiö
  • VetenskapsrÃ¥det (2015-02684)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Tactile and Sensory Interactions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Infant Health and Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Music Perception
Keywords
affective touch, C-tactile afferents, infant brain development, insula, middle temporal gyrus, hemoglobin response, diffuse optical tomography, social bonding, parental bonding, tactile communication, primary somatosensory cortex
MeSH terms
Affect, Afferent Pathways, Child Development, Female, Humans, Infant, Male, Physical Stimulation, Somatosensory Cortex, Temporal Lobe, Spectroscopy, Near-Infrared, Touch Perception

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