Cited by 108Neural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesTreatment of Major Depression

Depression symptoms and cognitive control of emotion cues: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study

Open access
Beevers, C.G., Clasen, P., Stice, E., Schnyer, D.·2010·Neuroscience

Abstract

Few studies have examined associations between depressive symptoms and alterations in neural systems that subserve cognitive control. Cognitive control was assessed with an exogenous cueing task using happy, sad, and neutral facial expressions as cues among women with mild to moderate symptoms of depression and a non-depressed control group while functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) measured brain activity. Amygdala and medial/orbital prefrontal cortex (PFC) response to valid emotion cues did not differ as a function of depression symptoms. However, significant depression group differences were observed when task demands required cognitive control. Participants with elevated depression symptoms showed weaker activation in right and left lateral PFC and parietal regions when shifting attentional focus away from invalid emotion cues. No depression group differences were observed for invalid non-emotional cues. Findings suggest that mild to moderate depression symptoms are associated with altered function in brain regions that mediate cognitive control of emotional information.

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.neuroscience.2010.01.047

Cites

23 of 23 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?

  • This deficit in inhibitory regulation by the anterior cingulate and prefrontal results in an overactive amygdala as well as biases in memory towards negative stimuli and away from positive stimuli.

    “This deficit in inhibitory regulation by the anterior cingulate and prefrontal results in an overactive amygdala as well as biases in memory towards negative stimuli and away from positive stimuli [57–60].”

    From Association between time perspective and metacognition among Lebanese adults: the mediating role of mindfulness (2023) · cites this paper as [60]

    The Abstract and Discussion (page unavailable) report weaker lateral prefrontal activation during cognitive control of emotional cues in women with mild to moderate depressive symptoms. They do not establish an anterior cingulate deficit or a bias in memory toward negative and away from positive stimuli. The study found no depression-group difference in amygdala activity, so it does not support the claimed resulting overactive amygdala. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In depressed individuals, processing of negative information is associated with stronger and longer-lasting amygdala activation.

    “Among individuals with depression, processing of negative information is associated with stronger and longer lasting activation of the amygdala (Beevers et al., 2010; Drevets, 2001; Fu et al., 2004; Siegle et al., 2002; Stuhrmann et al., 2013), a region responsible for interpreting the emotional quality and salience of a given stimulus (Fu et al., 2004).”
  • Past studies have found impairments in cognitive control in individuals with depression when they are confronted with emotional information.

    “Past studies have found impairments in cognitive control in individuals with depression when confronted with emotional information (Beevers et al. 2010; Ditcher et al. 2009; Fales et al. 2008).”

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
Beevers, C. G., Clasen, P., Stice, E., & Schnyer, D.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Beevers, C.G.
Venue
Neuroscience
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
167
Issue
1
Pages
97-103
ISSN
0306-4522 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2125072783
Cited by
108
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 5
FWCI
3.30
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH076897)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
depression, cognitive control, emotion cues, facial expressions, cue validity, attentional shift, amygdala, medial prefrontal cortex, lateral prefrontal cortex, parietal cortex, emotional processing, women
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Amygdala, Brain Mapping, Cognition, Cues, Depression, Emotions, Facial Expression, Female, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Neural Pathways, Neuropsychological Tests, Parietal Lobe, Visual Perception, Prefrontal Cortex, Young Adult

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