CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 197Child Abuse and TraumaNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesStress Responses and Cortisol

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Early childhood stress exposure, reward pathways, and adult decision making

Open access
Birn, Rasmus M., Roeber, Barbara J., Pollak, Seth D.·2017·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
DOI 10.1073/pnas.1708791114PMC PMC5754769
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Individuals who have experienced chronic and high levels of stress during their childhoods are at increased risk for a wide range of behavioral problems, yet the neurobiological mechanisms underlying this association are poorly understood. We measured the life circumstances of a community sample of school-aged children and then followed these children for a decade. Those from the highest and lowest quintiles of childhood stress exposure were invited to return to our laboratory as young adults, at which time we reassessed their life circumstances, acquired fMRI data during a reward-processing task, and tested their judgment and decision making. Individuals who experienced high levels of early life stress showed lower levels of brain activation when processing cues signaling potential loss and increased responsivity when actually experiencing losses. Specifically, those with high childhood stress had reduced activation in the posterior cingulate/precuneus, middle temporal gyrus, and superior occipital cortex during the anticipation of potential rewards; reduced activation in putamen and insula during the anticipation of potential losses; and increased left inferior frontal gyrus activation when experiencing an actual loss. These patterns of brain activity were associated with both laboratory and real-world measures of individuals' risk taking in adulthood. Importantly, these effects were predicated only by childhood stress exposure and not by current levels of life stress.

Overview

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1708791114

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Fig. 1. Schematic of the MID task used in this study. Participants were presented with a cue indicating the amount of potential monetary gain or loss. A triangle (“TARGET”) briefly appeared on the screen, and the participant had to press a button while the triangle was on the screen to win or avoid losing money. Pressing the button too early or too late resulted in no win or a loss. Feedback was then provided to indicate success or failure on that trial.
Fig. 1. Schematic of the MID task used in this study. Participants were presented with a cue indicating the amount of potential monetary gain or loss. A triangle (“TARGET”) briefly appeared on the screen, and the participant had to press a button while the triangle was on the screen to win or avoid losing money. Pressing the button too early or too late resulted in no win or a loss. Feedback was then provided to indicate success or failure on that trial.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 2. Brain areas where the difference between the anticipation of potential large rewards (+$5) vs. no rewards (+$0) is significantly correlated with early life stress. Blue regions indicate areas where the brain activation during the anticipation of potential rewards vs. no rewards is negatively correlated with early life stress. That is, the participants with higher early life stress showed lower activation in the precuneus, middle temporal gyrus, and cerebellum during the anticipation of potential rewards (P < 0.05).
Fig. 2. Brain areas where the difference between the anticipation of potential large rewards (+$5) vs. no rewards (+$0) is significantly correlated with early life stress. Blue regions indicate areas where the brain activation during the anticipation of potential rewards vs. no rewards is negatively correlated with early life stress. That is, the participants with higher early life stress showed lower activation in the precuneus, middle temporal gyrus, and cerebellum during the anticipation of potential rewards (P < 0.05).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 3. Brain areas where the difference between the anticipation of potential large losses (−$5) vs. no loss (−$0) is significantly correlated with early life stress. Blue regions indicate areas where the brain activation during the anticipation of potential losses vs. no loss is negatively related to early life stress. That is, subjects with higher early life stress showed lower activation in the insula and putamen during the anticipation of potential losses (P < 0.01).
Fig. 3. Brain areas where the difference between the anticipation of potential large losses (−$5) vs. no loss (−$0) is significantly correlated with early life stress. Blue regions indicate areas where the brain activation during the anticipation of potential losses vs. no loss is negatively related to early life stress. That is, subjects with higher early life stress showed lower activation in the insula and putamen during the anticipation of potential losses (P < 0.01).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 4. Brain areas where differences in the response to missing the target on a loss vs. no-loss trial (i.e., response to losing money) is correlated with early life stress. Yellow/orange regions show brain areas where the activation during the response to loss vs. no-loss trials is positively correlated with early life stress. Significantly greater activation was observed in the putamen and inferior frontal gyrus in subjects with higher early life stress.
Fig. 4. Brain areas where differences in the response to missing the target on a loss vs. no-loss trial (i.e., response to losing money) is correlated with early life stress. Yellow/orange regions show brain areas where the activation during the response to loss vs. no-loss trials is positively correlated with early life stress. Significantly greater activation was observed in the putamen and inferior frontal gyrus in subjects with higher early life stress.CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 5. Individual differences in risky behaviors, measured from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, are correlated with measures of early life stress (assessed using the YLSI; P < 0.0003). This effect held even after controlling for current life stress (assessed using the LSI; P < 0.05).
Fig. 5. Individual differences in risky behaviors, measured from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, are correlated with measures of early life stress (assessed using the YLSI; P < 0.0003). This effect held even after controlling for current life stress (assessed using the LSI; P < 0.05).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central
Fig. 6. Across participants, an index of risky behaviors (measured from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey) is significantly correlated with the activation of the putamen during the anticipation of potential loss in the MID task (A), but not with the activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus during the response to the loss (B).
Fig. 6. Across participants, an index of risky behaviors (measured from the Youth Risk Behavior Survey) is significantly correlated with the activation of the putamen during the anticipation of potential loss in the MID task (A), but not with the activation in the left inferior frontal gyrus during the response to the loss (B).CC BY-NC-ND · PubMed Central

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–197 of 197

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Birn, R. M., Roeber, B. J., & Pollak, S. D.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
Corresponding author
  • Birn, Rasmus M.
  • Pollak, Seth D.
ORCID
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Publisher
National Academy of Sciences
Published
2017-12-04
Volume
114
Issue
51
Pages
13549-13554
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
DOI
10.1073/pnas.1708791114
PMC
PMC5754769
OpenAlex
W2774496090
Cited by
197
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 30 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 7
FWCI
16.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
HHS | National Institutes of Health (MH61285, MH68858, HD03352)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child Abuse and Trauma
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Behavioral Neuroscience › Stress Responses and Cortisol
Keywords
early childhood stress, reward processing, loss anticipation, decision-making, risk-taking, reward pathways, posterior cingulate cortex, insula, putamen, inferior frontal gyrus, living conditions, brain development
MeSH terms
Child, Child Abuse, Decision Making, Female, Humans, Male, Reward, Stress, Psychological, 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