Neural Activation for Emotional Induction: Differential Responses as a Function of Impulsivity and Reward-Sensitivity

 C.E.Benca1, H.R. Collins1, C.R. Corbly1, Y. Jiang2, T.H. Kelly2, & J.E. Joseph1

 1 Department of Anatomy & Neurobiology 2 Department of Behavioral Science, University of Kentucky

Background

TaskMethods

High sensation seeking is associated with risky behaviors and negative behavioral outcomes (Bardo et al., 1996; Roberti, 2004)

High sensation seekers are more sensitive to arousal than low sensation seekers (Joseph et al., 2009; Zuckerman, 2005)

However, little is known about neural systems involved in emotional reactivity among individuals varying in sensation seeking traits.

Present Research Goal: Identify regions recruited by subjects who vary on key characteristics of sensation seeking for positive and negative valence pictures that are high and low in arousal.

Greater activation for high-impulsive than for low-impulsive groups

Bardo, M.T., Donohew, R.L., & Harrington, N.G. (1996). Psychobiologyof novelty seeking and drug seeking behavior. Behavioural Brain Research, 77, 23–43.

Joseph, J.E., Liu, X., Jiang, Y., Lynam, D., & Kelly, T. (2009). Neural correlates of emotional reactivity in sensation seeking. Psychological Science, 20, 215-223.

Roberti, J.W. (2004). A review of behavioral and biological correlatesof sensation seeking. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 256 – 279.

Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of personality. Cambridge, England:Cambridge University Press.

Zuckerman, M., Kuhlman, D.M., Joireman, J., Teta, P., & Kraft, M.(1993). A comparison of three structural models of personality: The big three, the big five, and the alternative five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 757–768.

This research was supported by NICHD R01 HD052724, COBRE P20 RR-15592 CDART P50 DA00312

References

Participants were classified into 4 groups based on scores from the Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire (Zuckerman, et al., 1993).

Low reward seeking and low impulsivity (LSS), Low reward seeking, high impulsivity (Impuls), High reward seeking, low impulsivity (Reward) & High reward seeking, high impulsivity (HSS).

Participants:

fMRI Procedures: Siemen’s 3T TrioTR=2.5s, TE=30ms, FA=84°,40 3.5-mm axial slicesEvent-related design

Stimuli were 200 IAPS pictures presented for 1 second each:

50 HAN, 50 HAP, 50 LAN, 50 LAP

Low Arousal Positive

(LAP)

High Arousal Positive(HAP)

High Arousal Negative

(HAN)

Low Arousal Negative

(LAN)

Summary

The impulsivity dimension was more strongly implicated in emotional reactivity than the reward-sensitivity dimension, as assessed with the present task

Although all regions showed greater activation for high arousal stimuli, valence effects also emerged – positive pictures showed more activation than negative pictures, especially for high-impulsive individuals in the anterior cingulate

The anterior cingulate is involved in emotional regulation and cognitive control; individual differences in emotional reactivity in this region may be associated with dysregulated behaviors due to impulsivity.

Low Reward High Reward

Low Impulsivity LSS: n = 19 (9F) Reward: n = 18 (9F)

High Impulsivity Impulse: n = 14 (8F) HSS: n = 20 (10F)

Press the button when you see each picture

z = 4.75, P < .0001

-4, 44, 16 4, 46, 16 z = 4.75, P < .000128,-10, -14

z = 4.75, P < .0001

LR

Especially for positive pictures in left anterior cingulate [Valence x Impulsivity interaction: F(1, 67) = 7.1, p=.01]

High-impulsive or high-reward sensitive subjects showed greater activation to positive pictures in right anterior cingulate [Valence x Impulsivity x Reward Sensitivity interaction: F(1. 67) = 5.0, p = .029]

But no interaction with valence in right amygdala / hippocampus [Valence effect: F(1, 67) = 6.7, p=.012]