Cited by 171Face Recognition and PerceptionNeuroendocrine regulation and behaviorEvolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior

The neural basis of maternal responsiveness to infants: an fMRI study

Ranote, S., Elliott, R., Abel, K. M., Mitchell, R., Deakin, J. F. W., Appleby, L.·2004·NeuroReport

Abstract

Using fMRI, we examined the neural correlates of maternal responsiveness. Ten healthy mothers viewed alternating blocks of video: (i) 40 s of their own infant; (ii) 20 s of a neutral video; (iii) 40 s of an unknown infant and (iv) 20 s of neutral video, repeated 4 times. Predominant BOLD signal change to the contrasts of infants minus neutral stimulus occurred in bilateral visual processing regions (BA 19,21,37,38); to own infant minus unknown infant in right anterior temporal pole (BA 38), left amygdala and visual cortex (BA 19), and to the unknown infant minus own infant contrast in bilateral orbitofrontal cortex (BA 10,47) and medial prefrontal cortex (BA 8) [corrected] These findings suggest that amygdala and temporal pole may be key sites in mediating a mother's response to her infant and reaffirms their importance in face emotion processing and social behaviour.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/01.wnr.0000137078.64128.6a

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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 amygdala is strongly activated in some studies but deactivated in another.

    “The amygdala, for example, is strongly activated in some studies (20;23), but deactivated in another (22).”
  • Some maternal response studies have failed to show striatal activation.

    “However, some maternal response studies have failed to show striatal activation (20;21), among other important differences.”
  • Human mothers showed a greater activity of response in the midbrain, periaqueductal grey and striatum, OFC, medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula and precuneus to their own- versus other-baby pictures or videos.

    “Indeed, human mothers showed a greater activity of response in the midbrain, periaqueductal grey and striatum, OFC, medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate cortex, anterior insula and precuneus to their own- versus other-baby pictures (20,44) or videos (19,57).”

    From Neuroendocrinology of Parental Response to Baby‐Cry (2011) · cites this paper as [57]

  • Ranote et al. (2004) found significant activation in left amygdala and temporal pole for own versus unknown infant video in ten healthy mothers.

    “For these women, there was significant activation in the “own” versus “unknown” infant comparison in the left amygdala and temporal pole.”

    From The human parental brain: In vivo neuroimaging (2011) · cites this paper as Ranote et al., 2004

  • In 10 healthy mothers viewing alternating 40-second blocks of own neutral and unknown infant video, significant activation was reported in the left amygdala and temporal pole for own vs unknown infant comparison (Ranote et al., 2004).

    “They reported significant activation in “own” versus “unknown” infant comparison in the left amygdala and temporal pole”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ranote, S., Elliott, R., Abel, K. M., Mitchell, R., Deakin, J. F. W., & Appleby, L.
Affiliations
  • Royal Manchester Children's Hospital (GB)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
Venue
NeuroReport
Published
2004-08-06
Volume
15
Issue
11
Pages
1825-1829
ISSN
0959-4965 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2171654333
Cited by
167
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 13 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 14
FWCI
3.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroreport (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Evolutionary Psychology and Human Behavior
Keywords
maternal responsiveness, mother-infant interaction, infant face processing, amygdala, anterior temporal pole, orbitofrontal cortex, medial prefrontal cortex, visual cortex, social behavior, neural correlates
MeSH terms
Adult, Brain, Emotions, Female, Humans, Infant, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Maternal Behavior, Photic Stimulation, Video Recording

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