Brain mechanisms underlying the impact of attachment-related stress on social cognition

In the paper

“Scores for subjective stress experience (Wolpe, 1969) were obtained again at the beginning of the debriefing after scanning and showed no difference in mean scores when comparing both stress conditions in a paired samples t-test [t(14) = 1.07, p = 0.34].”

In the paper

“Results after stress exposure showed that the ASI condition resulted in reduced mentalization-related activation in the left posterior superior temporal sulcus (STS), left inferior frontal gyrus and left temporoparietal junction (TPJ).”

In the paper

“A random-effects whole-brain GLM analysis identified a left posterior STS region (136 functional voxels) with greater activation to mental state vs. age judgments during the baseline RMET-R.”

In the paper

“We identified a network of brain regions that responds differentially to age and mental state judgments during the RMET-R in the absence of any pre-task stress induction (Figure 1).”

In the paper

“Baseline results replicated and extended previous findings regarding the neural correlates of the RMET-R.”

In the paper

“Moreover, the left middle frontal gyrus and left anterior insula showed greater functional connectivity to the left posterior STS after the ASI.”

In the paper

“Regions that showed more activation to age judgments included bilateral inferior parietal lobules (right: t = −11.76, p < 0.0001; left: t = −7.73, p < 0.0001), right middle frontal gyrus (MFG; t = −5.92, p < 0.0001), PCC extending into precuneus (t = −10.14, p < 0.0001), right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (t = −6.19, p < 0.0001), right inferior temporal gyrus (t = −9.72, p < 0.0001), and left c”

In the paper

“In sum, using a novel modification of the RMET, we identified the left posterior STS and left IFG as brain regions that were modulated by attachment stressors during mental state judgments accompanying compromised behavioral performance, as well as the left TPJ, which showed an effect of stressor type during both mental state and age judgments.”

In the paper

“Again, no regions were more active during age judgments after the ASI compared with the GSI.”

In the paper

“When we compared functional connectivity to the functionally-defined left posterior STS during mental state judgments after the two stress inductions, regions that showed greater functional connectivity to the left posterior STS after the ASI included the left MFG (t = 4.90, p < 0.001) and left anterior insula (AI; t = 5.24, p < 0.001).”

In the paper

“Bilateral AI (right: t = −3.94, p < 0.01; left: t = −5.66, p < 0.001), right middle temporal gyrus extending into parahippocampal gyrus and fusiform gyrus (t = −5.37, p < 0.001), right dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (t = −6.28, p < 0.001), and left fusiform gyrus (t = −4.58, p < 0.001) were more functionally connected to the left posterior STS during age judgments post-GSI vs. post-ASI.”

In the paper

“When we compared activation during mental state judgments between the two types of stress inductions in the identified task-related areas, we localized regions that were more active during mental state judgments after the GSI compared with the ASI. These regions included the left IFG (t = −2.93, p < 0.05), left posterior STS (t = −5.02, p < 0.001), and left temporal parietal junction (t = −4.83, p”

• Also stated in: § fMRI · plain

  “Thus, post-ASI, activation in these three regions decreased significantly in comparison to post-GSI.”

In the paper

“No regions were more functionally connected to the left posterior STS during mental state judgments post-GSI.”

In the paper

“There were no regions that were more active during mental state judgments after the ASI compared with the GSI.”

In the paper

“The cuneus showed increased functional connectivity to the left posterior STS following the ASI compared with the GSI (t = 3.78, p < 0.01).”

In the paper

“The same analysis within age judgments identified only one region that was more active during age judgments after the GSI compared with the ASI: the left TPJ (t = −5.08, p < 0.001).”

In the paper

“Indeed, implicit mentalization, defined as reflexive, automatic processing of mental states that does not require conscious, verbal efforts, engages the fusiform face area, STS, inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and premotor areas (Allison et al., 2000; Pelphrey et al., 2003; Vuilleumier and Pourtois, 2007; Iacoboni, 2009; Vander Wyk et al., 2009).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Allison et al., 2000
• Not checked yetcites Pelphrey et al., 2003
• Not checked yetcites Vuilleumier and Pourtois, 2007

In the paper

“The neural system that underpins mentalizing comprises the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), temporoparietal junction (TPJ), temporal poles, superior temporal sulcus (STS), and posterior cingulate cortex (PCC)/precuneus (Gallagher and Frith, 2003; Saxe and Kanwisher, 2003; Frith and Frith, 2006; Lieberman, 2007).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Gallagher and Frith, 2003
• Not checked yetcites Saxe and Kanwisher, 2003
• Not checked yetcites Frith and Frith, 2006

In the paper

“Previous research supports the latter hypothesis, as associations have been reported between childhood parental maltreatment and impaired mentalization (Cicchetti et al., 2003; Pears and Fisher, 2005).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Cicchetti et al., 2003
• Not checked yetcites Pears and Fisher, 2005

In the paper

“As expected, the RMET reliably engages key nodes of the mentalizing system, including the MPFC, posterior STS, and IFG (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999; Russell et al., 2000; Adams et al., 2009; Moor et al., 2012).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
• Not checked yetcites Russell et al., 2000
• Not checked yetcites Adams et al., 2009

In the paper

“Increases in salivary cortisol and subjective ratings of experienced stress post-induction also supported the validity of the procedure (Nolte et al., submitted).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Nolte et al., submitted

In the paper

“Using this technique, we previously provided evidence that exposure to an attachment-related stressor affects participants' accuracy scores on the RMET-R, compared with performance under no stress.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Nolte et al., submitted

In the paper

“This calculated cluster threshold only eliminates the significance of the result in left IFG.”

In the paper

“As an example, when one experiences interpersonal stress that activates this attachment system, the capacity to understand someone else's mental state may be reduced, distorted, and less flexible, potentially corresponding to reduced attention to social cues (Luyten et al., under review).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Luyten et al., under review

In the paper

“However, The TSST does not operationalize stress in a truly individualized induction paradigm based upon individually significant interpersonal life events.”

In the paper

“Although behavioral studies employing the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST; Kirschbaum et al., 1993) have shown that stress affects subsequent performance on a variety of cognitive and physiological processes (Kudielka et al., 2004, 2007; Kuhlmann et al., 2005; Roelofs et al., 2005), the TSST was not shown to affect performance on the RMET (Smeets et al., 2009).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Smeets et al., 2009

In the paper

“In line with this theory, there is growing evidence confirming that emotional arousal and psychosocial stress, especially when related to attachment relationships (with parents, romantic partners, close family members in situations entailing loss, abandonment, abuse etc.), behaviorally impair both explicit and implicit mentalizing (Repacholi and Slaughter, 2003; Moriguchi et al., 2006; Lieberman,”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Repacholi and Slaughter, 2003
• Not checked yetcites Moriguchi et al., 2006
• Not checked yetcites Lieberman, 2007

In the paper

“Our findings indicate that attachment-related stress has a unique effect on the neural correlates of mentalization.”

In the paper

“Perceived threats, fear and psychosocial stress have been shown to behaviorally activate an individual's attachment system, prompting a series of brain-modulated processes that ultimately aim to regulate the stress response by drawing on one's mental representations of attachment figures (i.e., parents, romantic partners) for comfort (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007

In the paper

“Although our results do not provide direct evidence regarding a link between neural and behavioral findings, previous work has established reliable relationships between the behavioral performance of the RMET and its neural correlates (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999; Russell et al., 2000; Adams et al., 2009; Moor et al., 2012).”

In the paper

“Additionally, differential functional connectivity to the left posterior STS during both tasks post-ASI, compared with post-GSI, corroborated the hypothesis that attachment-related stress uniquely alters the engagement of brain networks involved in mentalizing.”

In the paper

“On a neural level, our findings are, furthermore, indicative of a substantial reduction in activation during mental state judgments, due to attachment-related stress. This reduction in activation occurred in several regions of the core neural system that integrates controlled, effortful (explicit) and automatic, reflexive (implicit) mentalization (the TPJ, IFG, and STS).”

In the paper

“This provides support for Fonagy and Luyten's model (Fonagy and Luyten, 2009; Nolte et al., 2011; Luyten et al., under review), which proposes that stress-induced affective states compromise social cognition in the context of intimate relationships.”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Fonagy and Luyten, 2009
• Not checked yetcites Nolte et al., 2011
• Not checked yetcites Luyten et al., under review

In the paper

“While we took efforts to match the inductions on the level of induced stress, we do not have data that speak to the simultaneous induction of other emotions and underpinning neural networks that may have occurred with more intensity during ASI (such as fear, anger, sadness, or a complex combination thereof).”

In the paper

“This finding follows behavioral work showing the specific effects of attachment-related stress on mentalizing, and thus suggests a neurobiological basis by which these effects likely occur.”

In the paper

“While our aforementioned results showed that left posterior STS activation is compromised following the attachment-related stressor, increased temporal coupling with the AI and MFG post-ASI is in line with decreased performance accuracy after experiencing attachment-related stress.”

In the paper

“Left IFG did not survive cluster correction to α < 0.05.”

In the paper

“Indeed, reduced accuracy and the reduction in activation of areas underpinning mentalization might be related to the setting in motion of the behavioral attachment system (Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Mikulincer and Shaver, 2007

In the paper

“Overall, these results suggest that when performing our extended version of the revised RMET with a modified control task, the previously established mentalization neural network is engaged.”

In the paper

“the small number of participants with fMRI and behavioral data (12) occluded the possibility of performing direct investigations of correlations between behavioral responses and fMRI data.”

In the paper

“In sum, using a novel modification of the RMET, we identified the left posterior STS and left IFG as brain regions that were modulated by attachment stressors during mental state judgments accompanying compromised behavioral performance, as well as the left TPJ, which showed an effect of stressor type during both mental state and age judgments.”

In the paper

“The results obtained from the RMET-R at baseline replicated findings from previous studies on the neural processes underpinning mental state decoding operationalized with the RMET (Baron-Cohen et al., 1999; Russell et al., 2000; Adams et al., 2009).”

What the sources say

• Not checked yetcites Baron-Cohen et al., 1999
• Not checked yetcites Russell et al., 2000
• Not checked yetcites Adams et al., 2009

In the paper

“In contrast, decreased temporal coupling of the left posterior STS and AI during age judgments post-ASI supports the specificity of this hypothesis to mentalization processes.”

In the paper

“Finally, even though we were specifically interested in the subjective experience of distress, we do not provide evidence for alterations of psychophysiological indices such as heart rate variability or cortisol levels associated with the different stress conditions.”

In the paper

“In addition, these results provide a more detailed understanding of the effects of stress on social cognition, suggesting that factors including the nature of the stressor and the type of social reasoning interact in meaningful ways to shape neural correlates of social cognition.”