The DOI matches its Crossref record; 63 of the 63 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 59 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
What’s in a smile? Maternal brain responses to infant facial cues
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES. Our goal was to determine how a mother's brain responds to her own infant's facial expressions, comparing happy, neutral, and sad face affect. METHODS. In an event-related functional MRI study, 28 first-time mothers were shown novel face images of their own 5- to 10-month-old infant and a matched unknown infant. Sixty unique stimuli from 6 categories (own-happy, own-neutral, own-sad, unknown-happy, unknown-neutral, and unknown-sad) were presented randomly for 2 seconds each, with a variable 2- to 6-second interstimulus interval. RESULTS. Key dopamine-associated reward-processing regions of the brain were activated when mothers viewed their own infant's face compared with an unknown infant's face. These included the ventral tegmental area/substantia nigra regions, the striatum, and frontal lobe regions involved in (1) emotion processing (medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate, and insula cortex), (2) cognition (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex), and (3) motor/behavioral outputs (primary motor area). Happy, but not neutral or sad own-infant faces, activated nigrostriatal brain regions interconnected by dopaminergic neurons, including the substantia nigra and dorsal putamen. A region-of-interest analysis revealed that activation in these regions was related to positive infant affect (happy > neutral > sad) for each own–unknown infant-face contrast. CONCLUSIONS. When first-time mothers see their own infant's face, an extensive brain network seems to be activated, wherein affective and cognitive information may be integrated and directed toward motor/behavioral outputs. Dopaminergic reward-related brain regions are activated specifically in response to happy, but not sad, infant faces. Understanding how a mother responds uniquely to her own infant, when smiling or crying, may be the first step in understanding the neural basis of mother–infant attachment.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
In 28 first-time mothers, viewing their own 5–10-month-old baby’s face activated dopamine-associated reward and frontolimbic brain regions compared with an unknown baby’s face. Happy own-baby faces specifically activated nigrostriatal regions, with a graded response across happy, neutral, and sad affect.
Key findings
- Own > unknown baby faces activated reward-processing regions including ventral tegmental area/substantia nigra, striatum, and frontal regions for emotion, cognition, and motor output (P<0.001, FDR q<0.05).
- Happy own-baby faces versus unknown happy faces activated nigrostriatal regions including substantia nigra and dorsal putamen (P<0.0005, FDR q<0.05); neutral own faces showed weaker activation in 4 of 6 regions (P<0.01), and no region showed significant own > unknown sad-face activation.
- Region-of-interest analyses showed a graded response by infant affect (happy > neutral > sad); sad responses were significantly lower than happy responses in each region (P<0.005, except amygdala P<0.05).
- Mothers’ own feelings correlated with how they imagined the baby felt (r=0.82, P<0.001), and they were more sensitive to their own baby’s affect than to unknown baby faces (own r=0.87 vs unknown r=0.80; slope own=0.84 vs unknown=0.49, P<0.05).
Methods
- Event-related fMRI study of 28 first-time mothers shown novel images of their own 5–10-month-old baby and a matched unknown baby; 60 unique stimuli from 6 categories (own/unknown × happy/neutral/sad) were presented for 2 seconds each with a 2–6 second inter-stimulus interval.
- Mothers were enrolled during the third trimester; babies were videotaped around 7 months post-delivery, and scanning occurred at least 3 months later. During the second scanning run, data were available for 26 women because of head motion in one case and scanner failure in another.
- Analyses used random-effects GLM with FDR correction at q<0.05, cluster threshold 100 mm³ except brainstem at 30 mm³, plus region-of-interest random-effects analyses and 2-factor repeated-measures ANOVAs.
Limitations
- Stated: mothers were scanned at varying times postpartum (7–17 months) and viewed baby faces ranging from 5 to 10 months, which may have influenced results.
- Stated: key animal-derived maternal brain regions such as the medial preoptic area and ventral bed nucleus of the stria terminalis were not activated; prior fMRI work suggests these may be more important in the early postpartum period.
- Stated: individual variation within the sample (breastfeeding duration, mother–infant separation, psychopathology risk) limits interpretation; evident from the text: the second scanning run showed no significant activation, and no significant main effect of affect or identity × affect interaction was found.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
30 Not checked yet · 29 Own result · 10 Own method · 9 Own interpretation
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also activated were striatal and midbrain regions including the ventral striatum, head of caudate, putamen, ventral tegmental area (VTA) and substantia nigra.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Other significant areas included regions of the inferior, middle and superior temporal gyri (including the fusiform gyrus and temporal pole), the lateral amygdala, thalamic nuclei and the hypothalamus (Table 2, Figure 3).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No significant activation was seen for any contrast during the second scanning run, where the baby face stimuli from Run 1 were repeated and data from 2 subjects were missing.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plainn = 2- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Significant activation was seen in four of the six regions using the “Own-Neutral” vs. “Unknown-Neutral” (ON>UN) contrast, although, as predicted, at much lower levels of statistical significance (P<0.01).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These regions essentially overlapped regions of significance in the main effects “identity” analysis for O>U (Figure 3).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As hypothesized, significant areas of activation were seen when the mothers were shown happy faces of their own baby compared to an unknown baby (OH>UH) (P<0.0005, FDR corrected q<0.05).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mothers also rated their feelings as being more “aroused” or intense for their own baby, compared to unknown baby faces (P<0.01, two sample t-test, 2-tailed).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Behavioral Rating of Baby Faces
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but the mothers’ emotional responses were more tightly correlated with their own baby’s affect than for unknown baby faces (Own: r=0.87; Unknown: r=0.80).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Behavioral Rating of Baby Faces
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This study shows that when first-time mothers observe their own baby’s face, all of the key dopamine-associated reward-processing regions of the brain are activated, including the midbrain VTA / substantia nigra regions, the striatum and the prefrontal cortex, as well as the primary motor area.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: BOLD signal changes in dopamine-associated brain regions reflect dopaminergic activity.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Happy, but not neutral or sad own-infant faces, activated nigrostriatal brain regions interconnected by dopaminergic neurons (P<0.0005, FDR q<0.05), including the substantia nigra and dorsal putamen.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > Abstract > Results
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 30
- Probably not a substantial claim. 21
- The quote only partly states this claim. 1
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, after contrasting “own” and “unknown” baby faces (ON>UN), no significant activation remained, even at lowered statistical thresholds (Figure 2C). Thus, there was no significant difference in posterior visual pathway response between the own and unknown baby face stimuli.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“As expected, face stimuli activated brain regions along the ventral visual pathway from the primary visual cortex to the temporal lobe, including the fusiform gyrus and the so-called “fusiform face area” (Figure 2A&B) (50).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [50] Haber SN, Fudge JL, McFarland NR. Striatonigrostriatal pathways in primates form an ascending spiral from the shell to the dorsolateral striatum. J Neurosci.2000;20(6):2369–2382 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“No brain region was significantly activated by infant “affect” as a main effect (F>15.66, df=2,54, using a random effects model, FDR corrected q<0.05), nor was an “identity x affect” interaction effect seen, with or without FDR correction.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A significant difference was also seen between happy and neutral affect in one region, and between neutral and sad affect in another (both P<0.05).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Smiling, but not neutral or sad, faces specifically activate nigrostriatal brain regions interconnected by dopaminergic neurons (51), with a graded response dependent on infant affect (happy>neutral>sad).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Crittenden PM, Claussen AH. The Organization of Attachment Relationships: Maturation, Culture, and Context. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press;2000
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: BOLD signal changes in dopamine-associated brain regions reflect dopaminergic activity.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Five specific regions of activation were seen in the limbic area (with a cluster threshold of 100 mm3), and one in the midbrain (cluster threshold 30 mm3), including bilateral putamen, left substantia nigra region, right thalamus, and the left lateral superior amygdala (Table 3).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As an example, in Figure 5 the left dorsal putamen and substantia nigra area, two key interconnecting dopaminergic brain regions, showed a significant fMRI-BOLD response to own-happy faces but much less to neutral faces, and no response difference was seen in the sad face contrast.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In all six regions, there appeared to be a progressive decrease in the % signal change differences, across happy, neutral and sad affect (Figure 4).”
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
“A region-of-interest analysis revealed that activation in these regions was related to positive infant affect (happy>neutral>sad) for each own-unknown baby face contrast.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Also stated in: § Results · plain
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This was evident from the contrast between sad faces and baseline, which revealed widespread activation in response to both own and unknown sad baby faces, though with a similar pattern for each.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In addition, most prior studies have had a small sample size (10 or fewer subjects) or used a suboptimal fixed effects analysis (24) which prevents generalization of the results to the population from which the sample was drawn (30).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Swain JE, Lorberbaum JP, Kose S, Strathearn L. Brain basis of early parent-infant interactions: psychology, physiology, and in vivo functional neuroimaging studies. J Child Psychol Psychiatry.2007;48(3/4):262–287 source
- Not checked yetcites [30] Huettel SA, Song AW, McCarthy G. Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates;2004
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Using a facial affect coding scheme, based on Cole et al (34), these images were classified by a trained research assistant into one of five affect groups: very happy, happy, neutral, sad or very sad. Excellent inter-observer reliability was demonstrated, based on 466 double coded images (Pearson correlation coefficient 0.925, 2-tailed, P<0.001).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Experimental Design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Cole et al (34)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Since the amygdala plays an important role in processing face affect (27), and its response may be modulated by dopamine (28;29), differences in baby face affect may have been a confounding factor.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [27] Fitzgerald DA, Angstadt M, Jelsone LM, Nathan PJ, Phan KL. Beyond threat: amygdala reactivity across multiple expressions of facial affect. Neuroimage.2006;30(4):1441–1448 source
- Not checked yetcites [28] Tessitore A, Hariri AR, Fera F, et al. Dopamine modulates the response of the human amygdala: a study in Parkinson's disease. J Neurosci.2002;22(20):9099–9103 source
- Not checked yetcites [29] Floresco SB, Tse MT. Dopaminergic regulation of inhibitory and excitatory transmission in the basolateral amygdala-prefrontal cortical pathway. J Neurosci.2007;27(8):2045–2057 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In addition, the ability to link these sensory cues with the underlying needs of an infant, and differentially respond to such needs, is thought to be the basis for establishing secure mother-infant attachment (15–17).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Murray L. The impact of postnatal depression on infant development. J Child Psychol Psychiatry.1992;33(3):543–561 source
- Not checked yetcites [16] Grienenberger JF, Kelly K, Slade A. Maternal reflective functioning, mother-infant affective communication, and infant attachment: exploring the link between mental states and observed caregiving behavior in the intergenerational transmission of attachment. Attach Hum Dev.2005;7(3):299–311 source
- Not checked yetcites [17] Bowlby J. Attachment and Loss.Vol 1. London, United Kingdom: Hogarth Press;1969
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The amygdala, for example, is strongly activated in some studies (20;23), but deactivated in another (22).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [20] Ranote S, Elliott R, Abel KM, Mitchell R, Deakin JF, Appleby L. The neural basis of maternal responsiveness to infants: an fMRI study [published correction appears in Neuroreport. 2004;15(14):2303]. Neuroreport.2004;15(11):1825–1829 source
- Not checked yetcites [23] Leibenluft E, Gobbini MI, Harrison T, Haxby JV. Mothers’ neural activation in response to pictures of their children and other children [published correction appears in Biol Psychiatry. 2004;56(8):612]. Biol Psychiatry.2004;56(4):225–232 source
- Not checked yetcites [22] Bartels A, Zeki S. The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage.2004;21(3):1155–1166 source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The false discovery rate (FDR) approach (44) was used to correct for multiple comparisons at a threshold of q<0.05, which accepts 5% of the discovered (supra-threshold) voxels as false positives.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Data Processing and Analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [44] Genovese CR, Lazar NA, Nichols T. Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate. Neuroimage.2002;15(4):870–878 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the random effects analysis, statistical maps were created for each individual subject before being subjected to a second level of statistical analysis, allowing generalization to the sample population of first-time mothers.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Data Processing and Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Several studies have shown that the striatum, a key projection of midbrain dopamine neurons which includes the putamen and caudate head, is activated in response to face images of a mother’s own child compared to unknown (or familiar but unrelated) children (22;23), as well as to infant cry stimuli (18).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22] Bartels A, Zeki S. The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage.2004;21(3):1155–1166 source
- Not checked yetcites [23] Leibenluft E, Gobbini MI, Harrison T, Haxby JV. Mothers’ neural activation in response to pictures of their children and other children [published correction appears in Biol Psychiatry. 2004;56(8):612]. Biol Psychiatry.2004;56(4):225–232 source
- Not checked yetcites [18] Lorberbaum JP, Newman JD, Horwitz AR, et al. A potential role for thalamocingulate circuitry in human maternal behavior. Biol Psychiatry.2002;51(6):431–445 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each subject baby was matched to a single control baby, with an equal number of face images from each affect group. Wherever possible, the two babies were also matched on age and race.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Experimental Design
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“One common theme emerging from these studies has been the possible role of the mesocorticolimbic dopamine system in processing reward-based signals and motivating maternal care, as seen in animal models (see review (24)).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [24] Swain JE, Lorberbaum JP, Kose S, Strathearn L. Brain basis of early parent-infant interactions: psychology, physiology, and in vivo functional neuroimaging studies. J Child Psychol Psychiatry.2007;48(3/4):262–287 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The mothers did not observe the videotaping, to ensure that each baby face image was novel when presented during the subsequent scanning session.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Experimental Design
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Similar activation patterns have been seen in response to pictures of romantic partners (22), beautiful faces (25) and sexual stimuli (26), suggesting a link between brain reward circuits and attachment.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > INTRODUCTION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [22] Bartels A, Zeki S. The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. Neuroimage.2004;21(3):1155–1166 source
- Not checked yetcites [25] Aharon I, Etcoff N, Ariely D, Chabris CF, O'Connor E, Breiter HC. Beautiful faces have variable reward value: fMRI and behavioral evidence. Neuron.2001;32(3):537–551 source
- Not checked yetcites [26] Arnow BA, Desmond JE, Banner LL, et al. Brain activation and sexual arousal in healthy, heterosexual males. Brain.2002;125(pt 5):1014–1023 source
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Slices were positioned 30 degrees to the anterior commissure / posterior commissure (ACPC) line in the axial plane, downward from posterior to anterior, which (along with a reduced TE and slice thickness) has been shown to optimize visualization of the orbitofrontal cortex (36).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Experimental Design
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] McClure SM, Laibson DI, Loewenstein G, Cohen JD. Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards. Science.2004;306(5695):503–507 source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Anatomical regions were confirmed using the automated “Talairach Daemon” (searching for “nearest gray matter”) (45), and manually, using a human brain atlas (46).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Data Processing and Analysis
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [45] Lancaster JL, Woldorff MG, Parsons LM, et al. Automated Talairach atlas labels for functional brain mapping. Hum Brain Mapp.2000;10(3):120–131 source
- Not checked yetcites [46] Mai JK, Assheuer J, Paxinos G. Atlas of the Human Brain. 2nd ed. San Diego, CA: Elsevier;2004
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“There were no significant differences in the timing of “own” and “unknown” baby face images (natural log of mean presentation times, paired samples t-test, t=−0.73, df=29, P=0.47), or in the OH>UH, ON>UN or OS>US comparisons (df=9; Happy: t=1.52, P=0.16; Neutral: t=0.72, P=0.49; Sad: t=−1.69, P=0.13).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Experimental Design
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The protocol was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, and all subjects provided written informed consent.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Subjects
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One subject had more than 2 mm translation (2.3 mm) during Run 1, and analyses were repeated before and after excluding this subject. A single subject also had unacceptable head motion during Run 2 (3.2 mm translation and 3.5 mm rotation), and was excluded from further analyses.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Data Processing and Analysis
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Each striatal region is integrally connected to a corresponding region of the midbrain’s VTA and substantia nigra via ascending and descending dopaminergic neurons.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Crittenden PM, Claussen AH. The Organization of Attachment Relationships: Maturation, Culture, and Context. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press;2000
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Thus, the striatum is believed to be an important relay station between the limbic and motor systems, integrating affective information from limbic regions with cognitive information from the prefrontal cortex, in shaping motor/behavioral responses.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Crittenden PM, Claussen AH. The Organization of Attachment Relationships: Maturation, Culture, and Context. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press;2000
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“In responding to infant social cues, whether positive or negative, mothers need to integrate both affective and cognitive information about their baby, and evaluate competing demands, before choosing the most appropriate behavioral response (52;53).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [52] Shafritz KM, Collins SH, Blumberg HP. The interaction of emotional and cognitive neural systems in emotionally guided response inhibition. Neuroimage.2006;31(1):468–475 source
- Not checked yetcites [53] Mirenowicz J, Schultz W. Preferential activation of midbrain dopamine neurons by appetitive rather than aversive stimuli. Nature.1996;379(6564):449–451 source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In rat dams, extracellular dopamine release in the ventral striatum is associated with an increase in maternal behaviors, with the dopamine signal preceding the onset of the behavior (57).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [57] Milner JS, Halsey LB, Fultz J. Empathic responsiveness and affective reactivity to infant stimuli in high- and low-risk for physical child abuse mothers. Child Abuse Negl.1995;19(6):767–780 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In primates, Haber et al (51) demonstrated important anatomical feed-forward loops between the striatum and the VTA / substantia nigra region, suggesting that these striatonigrostriatal circuits funnel information between ventromedial (limbic), central (associative) and dorsolateral (motor) striatal regions (Figure 6).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Crittenden PM, Claussen AH. The Organization of Attachment Relationships: Maturation, Culture, and Context. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press;2000
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Likewise, there are corresponding connections between the striatum and the forebrain, including those involved in emotion processing (medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate, insula), cognition (dorsolateral prefrontal) and motor/behavioral outputs (primary motor area) (51).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [51] Crittenden PM, Claussen AH. The Organization of Attachment Relationships: Maturation, Culture, and Context. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press;2000
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Dopaminergic reward-related brain regions are activated specifically in response to happy, but not sad, baby faces.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > Abstract > Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Although functional MRI only measures blood-oxygen level dependent changes in brain activity, together these studies suggest that positive sensory cues from infants, such as a smiling facial expression, may stimulate dopamine release in the striatum, and promote responsive maternal care.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [56] Champagne FA, Chretien P, Stevenson CW, Zhang TY, Gratton A, Meaney MJ. Variations in nucleus accumbens dopamine associated with individual differences in maternal behavior in the rat. J Neurosci.2004;24(17):4113–4123 source
- Not checked yetcites [57] Milner JS, Halsey LB, Fultz J. Empathic responsiveness and affective reactivity to infant stimuli in high- and low-risk for physical child abuse mothers. Child Abuse Negl.1995;19(6):767–780 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: BOLD signal changes in dopamine-associated brain regions reflect dopaminergic activity.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One limitation of this study is that the mothers were scanned at varying times post-partum (between 7 and 17 months), viewing baby faces ranging from 5 to 10 months in age (Table 1).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, the difference in response between own and unknown happy faces in these dopamine-associated regions may be an index of the reward value or salience of the infant’s face to the mother, which may in turn relate to maternal sensitivity or child neglect.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: BOLD signal changes in dopamine-associated brain regions reflect dopaminergic activity.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“While individual variation seen within this population (such as breastfeeding duration, mother-infant separation, and psychopathology risk) is another limitation in interpreting study findings, it also presents an opportunity for further research into the significance of these individual differences.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although there is no published fMRI data on the question, mothers may respond differently to their infant at differing ages, which may have influenced our results.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“However, other fMRI studies have only demonstrated activation of these areas in mothers of younger babies, during the first few months of life (18, 24), suggesting that these regions may be more important during the early postpartum period.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] Lorberbaum JP, Newman JD, Horwitz AR, et al. A potential role for thalamocingulate circuitry in human maternal behavior. Biol Psychiatry.2002;51(6):431–445 source
- Not checked yetcites [24] Swain JE, Lorberbaum JP, Kose S, Strathearn L. Brain basis of early parent-infant interactions: psychology, physiology, and in vivo functional neuroimaging studies. J Child Psychol Psychiatry.2007;48(3/4):262–287 source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, it is possible that differences in timing of the two conditions could have biased the results, with earlier images expected to produce a stronger hemodynamic response.”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > DISCUSSION
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Most prior baby face studies did not specifically control for variation in affect or examine response differences related to facial affect.
“Although most baby face studies sought to standardize face affect, none of them specifically controlled for variation in affect, or examined response differences related to facial affect.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The control baby face images were unknown to each mother.
“Control baby face images, unknown to each mother, were collected from the babies of other enrolled mothers or mothers involved in the pilot study.”
The paper relies on this without support.
BOLD signal changes in dopamine-associated brain regions reflect dopaminergic activity.
“all of the key dopamine-associated reward-processing regions of the brain are activated”
The paper relies on this without support.
Maternal responses to infant behavioral cues may shape future child development.
“How a mother responds to her infant’s behavioral cues may have an important role in shaping future child development.”
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 source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies indicate that the mesolimbic DA system is activated as parents of both sexes view pictures of their own children but not pictures of other children, and this activation is enhanced by IN-OT [40,41,42].”
From The Neurobiology of Love and Pair Bonding from Human and Animal Perspectives (2023) · cites this paper as [41]
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Studies on rodent models and neuroimaging studies have shown that activation of the attachment system underpinning both caregiving and partner preference is associated with the activation of two specific systems that have consistently been shown to play an important role in promoting and maintaining maternal behavior: (a) the dopaminergic reward processing system (Champagne et al., 2004; Strathe”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn, Li, Fonagy, & Montague, 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“In both studies, challenges to the attachment system yielded greater ventral striatal activation in securely attached individuals, whereas in avoidant/dismissing individuals it was associated with a relative downregulation of reward-related activity.”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Mothers with secure attachment showed greater activation of brain reward regions, including the ventral striatum, and the oxytocin-associated hypothalamus/pituitary region.”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008, in press
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“Securely attached mothers continued to show greater activation in reward processing regions, whereas insecure/dismissing mothers, congruent with findings described earlier, showed reward system deactivation and insular activation in response to seeing their own infant's sad faces.”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008, in press
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
The cited source says what the claim attributes to it.
In the citing paper
“Dopamine-associated reward-processing regions were activated when mothers viewed their own vs. an unknown infant’s face, including ventral tegmental area/substantia nigra, and striatum.”
From Approaching the biology of human parental attachment: Brain imaging, oxytocin and coordinated assessments of mothers and fathers (2014) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“and the size of change from baseline oxytocin levels was positively correlated with brain activation to own infants in both regions.”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008, in press
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredThe check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“Peripheral oxytocin response during infant contact was also significantly higher in secure mothers”
From A developmental, mentalization-based approach to the understanding and treatment of borderline personality disorder (2009) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008, in press
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“In several human fMRI studies, responses to own- versus other-baby stimuli of first-time mothers during this early postpartum period show increased brain activity in several regions, including the orbitofrontal cortex (OFC), midbrain, striatum, cingulate, amygdala and insula (4,5,8,9,19,20).”
From Neuroendocrinology of Parental Response to Baby‐Cry (2011) · cites this paper as [20]
In the citing paper
“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 [20]
In the citing paper
“In mothers, the initial experiences of pleasure and activity in these brain circuits when exposed to their own infants’ cues may increase the salience of their infants’ stimuli and promote greater attention and bond-formation to ensure continuous engagement in sensitive caregiving (Strathearn et al., 2009a; Strathearn et al., 2008).”
From The maternal brain and its plasticity in humans (2016) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“having previously demonstrated that infants’ cues activate dopaminergically innervated brain reward circuits similar to those associated with drugs of abuse (Strathearn et al., 2008).”
From The maternal brain and its plasticity in humans (2016) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“They reported that dopamine-associated reward-processing regions of the brain were activated when mothers viewed their own infant’s face compared with an unknown infant’s face. These included the ventral tegmental area/substantia nigra regions, the striatum. In addition, there were frontal lobe responses in emotion processing (medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate, and insula cortex), cognition (d”
From The human parental brain: In vivo neuroimaging (2011) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“Finally, a region-of interest analysis revealed that activation in these regions was related to positive infant affect (happy>neutral>sad) for each own—unknown infant-face contrast.”
From The human parental brain: In vivo neuroimaging (2011) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, happy, but not neutral or sad own-infant faces, activated nigrostriatal brain regions interconnected by dopaminergic neurons, including the substantia nigra and dorsal putamen.”
From The human parental brain: In vivo neuroimaging (2011) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“Furthermore, happy, but not neutral or sad own-infant faces, activated nigrostriatal brain regions interconnected by dopaminergic neurons, including substantia nigra and dorsal putamen.”
From Approaching the biology of human parental attachment: Brain imaging, oxytocin and coordinated assessments of mothers and fathers (2014) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“In addition, there were frontal lobe responses in emotion processing (medial prefrontal, anterior cingulate, and insula cortex), cognition (dorsolateral prefrontal cortex), and motor/behavioral outputs (primary motor area).”
From Approaching the biology of human parental attachment: Brain imaging, oxytocin and coordinated assessments of mothers and fathers (2014) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“Finally, a region-of-interest analysis revealed that activation in these regions was related to positive infant affect (happy > neutral > sad) for each own–unknown infant-face contrast.”
From Approaching the biology of human parental attachment: Brain imaging, oxytocin and coordinated assessments of mothers and fathers (2014) · cites this paper as Strathearn et al., 2008
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > RESULTS > Maternal Brain Responses
“no significant regions of activation remained after contrasting OS with US (at P<0.001, cluster 30 mm2, uncorrected).”
§ What’s in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues > METHODS > Data Processing and Analysis
“A cluster threshold of 100 mm3 (or approximately 4 voxels) was used, except in the brainstem, where a threshold of 30 mm3 (or around 1 voxel) was used to reveal activation of smaller nuclei.”
Citations
Cites
(1969) · Cited by 18,340
Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential
Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1994) · Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0005-7916(94)90063-9 · Cited by 9,538
A neural substrate of prediction and reward
Schultz, W., Dayan, P., & Montague, P. R. (1997) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.275.5306.1593 · Cited by 9,388
Self-citationBeck, A. T., Steer, R. A., & Brown, G. (2011) · PsycTESTS Dataset · doi:10.1037/t00742-000 · Cited by 7,535
Epigenetic programming by maternal behavior
Weaver, I. C. G., Cervoni, N., Champagne, F. A., D'Alessio, A. C., Sharma, S., Seckl, J. R., Dymov, S., Szyf, M., & Meaney, M. J. (2004) · Nature Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nn1276 · Cited by 6,177
Thresholding of statistical maps in functional neuroimaging using the false discovery rate
Genovese, C. R., Lazar, N. A., & Nichols, T. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.1037 · Cited by 4,923
Separate neural systems value immediate and delayed monetary rewards
McClure, S. M., Laibson, D. I., Loewenstein, G., & Cohen, J. D. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1100907 · Cited by 3,089
Event-Related fMRI: Characterizing Differential Responses
Friston, K. J., Fletcher, P. C., Josephs, O., Holmes, A., Rugg, M. D., & Turner, R. (1998) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.1997.0306 · Cited by 2,017
Nongenomic Transmission Across Generations of Maternal Behavior and Stress Responses in the Rat
Francis, D., Diorio, J., Liu, D., & Meaney, M. J. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5442.1155 · Cited by 1,965
Ainsworth, M. D. S., & Bell, S. M. (1970) · Child Development · doi:10.2307/1127388 · Cited by 1,764
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 401–457 of 457
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0001
Baldwin, A. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780192888501.003.0014
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.003.0003
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0009
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0012
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0014
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0010
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0007
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0013
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0005
Goumalatsou, C. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.003.0002
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.003.0011
Denniston, A. K., & Mathewson, P. A. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.003.0004
Hjelde, N. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.003.0011
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.003.0010
Graham, B. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.003.0009
Plinio, S. D., Scalabrini, A., & Ebisch, S. J. H. (2022) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/pf5uh
Attachment Stimuli Trigger Widespread Synchrony across Multiple BrainsPreprint
Shimon-Raz, O., Yeshurun, Y., Ulmer-Yaniv, A., Levinkron, A., Salomon, R., & Feldman, R. (2023) · bioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · doi:10.1101/2023.02.10.527970
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0004
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0010
JABC, & JML (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0008
Baldwin, A. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0007
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0002
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0003
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780198827191.002.0011
Reference intervals—biochemistry
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780192888501.002.0012
Reference intervals—haematology
(2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/med/9780192888501.002.0013
Cooperative care as origins of the “happy ape”?
Yang, F. (2023) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x22001832
Level, R. A., Hutt, R. L., Mammen, M. A., & Moore, G. A. (2023) · Journal of Child and Family Studies · doi:10.1007/s10826-023-02698-7
Diventare genitori è un'esperienza Pnei
Carbonella, S., & Gandini, V. (2023) · PNEI REVIEW · doi:10.3280/pnei2023-002002
Neural correlates of altered emotional responsivity to infant stimuli in mothers who use substances
McCurdy, L. Y., Yip, S. W., Worhunsky, P. D., Zhai, Z. W., Kim, S., Strathearn, L., Potenza, M. N., Mayes, L. C., & Rutherford, H. J. V. (2024) · Journal of Psychiatric Research · doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2024.01.024
Self-citationWeissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0007
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0004
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0015
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0008
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0003
Weissmark, M. S. (2020) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780190686345.002.0005
Impact of parity and salivary hormonal levels on motivation towards infant emotionsPreprint
Sinisalo, H., Hahn, A. C., Jones, B. C., Bakermans‐Kranenburg, M. J., & Peltola, M. J. (2024) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/tcw2x
A Meta-Analysis of Parent Neural Responses: The Role of Child Emotion, Child Age, and Parent GenderPreprint
Niehaus, C. E., Selma-Toledo, M., Gonçalves, S. F., Mauro, K. L., Fuentes, A. G., Turpyn, C. C., Swain, J. E., Weiner, M., & Chaplin, T. M. (2024) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.4898258
Wu, Q., & O’Doherty, J. P. (2025) · OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) · doi:10.31219/osf.io/ncz4j_v2
Ethological Aspects of Child Development and Parent–Child Relationships
Maldonado-Durán, J. M. (2025) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-98319-1_5
Wu, Q., & O’Doherty, J. P. (2026) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-032-02925-6_6
Allen, A. M., Linde-Krieger, L. B., Baurley, J. W., Deschenes, J., Mallahan, S., Anderson, A., Tecot, S. R., & Rankin, L. A. (2026) · Addictive Behaviors · doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2026.108639
Cárdenas, E. F., Jackson, M., Garon‐Bissonnette, J., Harkness, K. L., Humphreys, K. L., & Kujawa, A. (2026) · Anxiety Stress & Coping · doi:10.1080/10615806.2026.2620592
Baldwin, A., Hjelde, N., Goumalatsou, C., & Myers, G. (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.002.0005
JABC, & JML (2016) · doi:10.1093/med/9780198719021.002.0006
Anhedonia in Postpartum Depression: The Role of Neuroinflammation and Dopamine Dysfunction
Motiejūnas, J., Ušinskienė, J., Characiejus, D., Tamosiunas, A. E., Tutkuvienė, J., Jatužis, D., Masiulis, N., Levin, O., Griškevičius, R., & Navickas, A. (2026) · Biological Psychiatry Global Open Science · doi:10.1016/j.bpsgos.2026.100826
Parental brain responses to own and unknown children’s emotional facial expressions: An fMRI study
Preckel, K., Bracher, A. J., Puhlmann, L. M. C., von Polier, G. G., White, L. O., & Vrtička, P. (2026) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-026-01496-0
BEHAVIOURAL AND NEUROBIOLOGICAL CORRELATES OF MATERNAL SENSITIVITY IN HEALTHY NEW MOTHERS
Elmadih, A. (2013) · Research Explorer (The University of Manchester)
Metadata
- Authors
- Strathearn, L., Li, J., Fonagy, P., & Montague, P. R.
- Affiliations
- Baylor College of Medicine (US)
- Human Neuroimaging Laboratory, Department of Neuroscience
- Venue
- Pediatrics
- Publisher
- American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP)
- Published
- 2008-07-01
- Volume
- 122
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 40-51
- ISSN
- 0031-4005 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-4275
- PMC
- PMC2597649
- OpenAlex
- W2100246886
- Cited by
- 460
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 67 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 31 · 2016: 50 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 29
- FWCI
- 11.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- PEDIATRICS (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute on Drug Abuse (DA 11723, R01DA011723)
- National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS045790, NS045790)
- National Center for Research Resources (O1RR00188, M01RR000188)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (K12-HD-41648, K23HD43097, K12HD041648, K23HD043097)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Face Recognition and Perception
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Endocrine and Autonomic Systems › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Infant Health and Development
- Keywords
- infant facial expressions, smiling, infant affect, ventral tegmental area, substantia nigra, striatum, maternal attachment, primiparous women
- MeSH terms
- Adult, Brain, Female, Humans, Infant, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Mother-Child Relations, Mothers, Pregnancy, Pregnancy Trimester, Third, Smiling
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-09, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-09 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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