scholarly journals Buffering Social Influence: Neural Correlates of Response Inhibition Predict Driving Safety in the Presence of a Peer

2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher N. Cascio ◽  
Joshua Carp ◽  
Matthew Brook O'Donnell ◽  
Francis J. Tinney ◽  
C. Raymond Bingham ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Social Context ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Neural Activity ◽  
Peer Pressure ◽  
Neural Systems ◽  
Fmri Session ◽  
Adolescent Risk

Adolescence is a period characterized by increased sensitivity to social cues, as well as increased risk-taking in the presence of peers. For example, automobile crashes are the leading cause of death for adolescents, and driving with peers increases the risk of a fatal crash. Growing evidence points to an interaction between neural systems implicated in cognitive control and social and emotional context in predicting adolescent risk. We tested such a relationship in recently licensed teen drivers. Participants completed an fMRI session in which neural activity was measured during a response inhibition task, followed by a separate driving simulator session 1 week later. Participants drove alone and with a peer who was randomly assigned to express risk-promoting or risk-averse social norms. The experimentally manipulated social context during the simulated drive moderated the relationship between individual differences in neural activity in the hypothesized cognitive control network (right inferior frontal gyrus, BG) and risk-taking in the driving context a week later. Increased activity in the response inhibition network was not associated with risk-taking in the presence of a risky peer but was significantly predictive of safer driving in the presence of a cautious peer, above and beyond self-reported susceptibility to peer pressure. Individual differences in recruitment of the response inhibition network may allow those with stronger inhibitory control to override risky tendencies when in the presence of cautious peers. This relationship between social context and individual differences in brain function expands our understanding of neural systems involved in top–down cognitive control during adolescent development.

Adolescent risk-taking is predicted by individual differences in cognitive control over emotional, but not non-emotional, response conflict

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 972-979 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morgan Botdorf ◽  
Gail M. Rosenbaum ◽  
Jamie Patrianakos ◽  
Laurence Steinberg ◽  
Jason M. Chein
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Emotional Response ◽  
Response Conflict ◽  
Adolescent Risk

scholarly journals Modernizing Conceptions of Valuation and Cognitive-Control Deployment in Adolescent Risk Taking

2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 102-109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathy T. Do ◽  
Paul B. Sharp ◽  
Eva H. Telzer
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Control System ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Computational Model ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Expected Value ◽  
Risky Decision Making ◽  
Risky Decision ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

Heightened risk taking in adolescence has long been attributed to valuation systems overwhelming the deployment of cognitive control. However, this explanation of why adolescents engage in risk taking is insufficient given increasing evidence that risk-taking behavior can be strategic and involve elevated cognitive control. We argue that applying the expected-value-of-control computational model to adolescent risk taking can clarify under what conditions control is elevated or diminished during risky decision-making. Through this lens, we review research examining when adolescent risk taking might be due to—rather than a failure of—effective cognitive control and suggest compelling ways to test such hypotheses. This effort can resolve when risk taking arises from an immaturity of the control system itself, as opposed to arising from differences in what adolescents value relative to adults. It can also identify promising avenues for channeling cognitive control toward adaptive outcomes in adolescence.

scholarly journals Revisiting the Neural Architecture of Decision-Making: Univariate and Multivariate Evidence for System-Based Models in Adolescence

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
João F. Guassi Moreira ◽  
Adriana S. Méndez Leal ◽  
Yael H. Waizman ◽  
Natalie Saragosa-Harris ◽  
Emilia Ninova ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Neural Activity ◽  
Brain Activity ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Risky Decision ◽  
Human Decision ◽  
Within Subjects ◽  
Multivariate Pattern

AbstractSystem-based theories are a popular approach to explaining the psychology of human decision making. Such theories posit that decision-making is governed by interactions between different psychological processes that arbitrate amongst each other for control over behavior. To date, system-based theories have received inconsistent support at the neural level, leading some to question their veracity. Here we examine the possibility that prior attempts to evaluate system-based theories have been limited by their reliance on predicting brain activity from behavior, and seek to advance evaluations of system-based models through modeling approaches that predict behavior from brain activity. Using within-subject decision-level modeling of fMRI data from a risk-taking task in a sample of over 2000 decisions across 51 adolescents—a population in which decision-making processes are particularly dynamic and consequential—we find support for system-based theories of decision-making. In particular, neural activity in lateral prefrontal cortex and a multivariate pattern of cognitive control both predicted a reduced likelihood of making a risky decision, whereas increased activity in the ventral striatum—a region typically associated with valuation processes—predicted a greater likelihood of engaging in risk-taking. These results comprise the first formalized within-subjects neuroimaging test of system-based theories, garnering support for the notion that competing systems drive decision behaviors.Significance StatementDecision making is central to adaptive behavior. While dominant psychological theories of decision-making behavior have found empirical support, their neuroscientific implementations have received inconsistent support. This may in part be due to statistical approaches employed by prior neuroimaging studies of system-based theories. Here we use brain modeling—an approach that predicts behavior from brain activity—of univariate and multivariate neural activity metrics to better understand how neural components of psychological systems guide decision behavior. We found broad support for system-based theories such that that neural systems involved in cognitive control predicted a reduced likelihood to make risky decisions, whereas value-based systems predicted greater risk-taking propensity.

Individual Differences in the Neural Dynamics of Response Inhibition

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (12) ◽  
pp. 1976-1996 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. Fiona Molloy ◽  
Giwon Bahg ◽  
Zhong-Lin Lu ◽  
Brandon M. Turner
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Response Inhibition ◽  
Bayesian Models ◽  
Accurate Estimation ◽  
Hierarchical Bayesian ◽  
Hierarchical Bayesian Models ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Aggregate Information

Response inhibition is a widely studied aspect of cognitive control that is particularly interesting because of its applications to clinical populations. Although individual differences are integral to cognitive control, so too is our ability to aggregate information across a group of individuals, so that we can powerfully generalize and characterize the group's behavior. Hence, an examination of response inhibition would ideally involve an accurate estimation of both group- and individual-level effects. Hierarchical Bayesian analyses account for individual differences by simultaneously estimating group and individual factors and compensate for sparse data by pooling information across participants. Hierarchical Bayesian models are thus an ideal tool for studying response inhibition, especially when analyzing neural data. We construct hierarchical Bayesian models of the fMRI neural time series, models assuming hierarchies across conditions, participants, and ROIs. Here, we demonstrate the advantages of our models over a conventional generalized linear model in accurately separating signal from noise. We then apply our models to go/no-go and stop signal data from 11 participants. We find strong evidence for individual differences in neural responses to going, not going, and stopping and in functional connectivity across the two tasks and demonstrate how hierarchical Bayesian models can effectively compensate for these individual differences while providing group-level summarizations. Finally, we validated the reliability of our findings using a larger go/no-go data set consisting of 179 participants. In conclusion, hierarchical Bayesian models not only account for individual differences but allow us to better understand the cognitive dynamics of response inhibition.

scholarly journals Connecting Brain Responsivity and Real-World Risk taking: Strengths and Limitations of Current Methodological Approaches

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lauren Sherman ◽  
Laurence Steinberg ◽  
Jason Chein
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Best Practice ◽  
Region Of Interest ◽  
Health Risk Behaviors ◽  
Risky Decision ◽  
Decision Points ◽  
Single Region ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
General Desire

AbstractIn line with the goal of limiting health risk behaviors in adolescence, a growing literature investigates whether individual differences in functional brain responses can be related to vulnerability to engage in risky decision-making. We review this body of work, investigate when and in what way findings converge, and provide best practice recommendations. We identified 23 studies that examined individual differences in brain responsivity and adolescent risk taking. Findings varied widely in terms of the neural regions identified as relating to risky behavior. This heterogeneity is likely due to the abundance of approaches used to assess risk taking, and to the disparity of fMRI tasks. Indeed, brain-behavior correlations were typically found in regions showing a main effect of task. However, results from a test of publication bias suggested that region of interest approaches lacked evidential value. The findings suggest that neural factors differentiating riskier teens are not localized to a single region. Therefore, approaches that utilize data from the entire brain, particularly in predictive analyses, may yield more reliable and applicable results. We discuss several decision points that researchers should consider when designing a study, and emphasize the importance of precise research questions that move beyond a general desire to address adolescent risk taking.

scholarly journals Meaningful Family Relationships: Neurocognitive Buffers of Adolescent Risk Taking

2013 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 374-387 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eva H. Telzer ◽  
Andrew J. Fuligni ◽  
Matthew D. Lieberman ◽  
Adriana Galván
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Family Relationships ◽  
Ventral Striatum ◽  
Family Relationship ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Brain Regions ◽  
Reward Processing ◽  
Family Obligation ◽  
Adolescent Risk

Discordant development of brain regions responsible for cognitive control and reward processing may render adolescents susceptible to risk taking. Identifying ways to reduce this neural imbalance during adolescence can have important implications for risk taking and associated health outcomes. Accordingly, we sought to examine how a key family relationship—family obligation—can reduce this vulnerability. Forty-eight adolescents underwent an fMRI scan during which they completed a risk-taking and cognitive control task. Results suggest that adolescents with greater family obligation values show decreased activation in the ventral striatum when receiving monetary rewards and increased dorsolateral PFC activation during behavioral inhibition. Reduced ventral striatum activation correlated with less real-life risk-taking behavior and enhanced dorsolateral PFC activation correlated with better decision-making skills. Thus, family obligation may decrease reward sensitivity and enhance cognitive control, thereby reducing risk-taking behaviors.

scholarly journals Brains of a feather flocking together? Peer and individual neurobehavioral risks for substance use across adolescence

2019 ◽  
Vol 31 (5) ◽  
pp. 1661-1674 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jungmeen Kim-Spoon ◽  
Kirby Deater-Deckard ◽  
Alexis Brieant ◽  
Nina Lauharatanahirun ◽  
Jacob Lee ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Substance Use ◽  
Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Medial Prefrontal Cortex ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Peer Influences ◽  
Brain Functions ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Peer Substance Use ◽  
Risk Processing

AbstractAdolescence is a period of heightened susceptibility to peer influences, and deviant peer affiliation has well-established implications for the development of psychopathology. However, little is known about the role of brain functions in pathways connecting peer contexts and health risk behaviors. We tested developmental cascade models to evaluate contributions of adolescent risk taking, peer influences, and neurobehavioral variables of risk processing and cognitive control to substance use among 167 adolescents who were assessed annually for four years. Risk taking at Time 1 was related to substance use at Time 4 indirectly through peer substance use at Time 2 and insular activation during risk processing at Time 3. Furthermore, neural cognitive control moderated these effects. Greater insular activation during risk processing was related to higher substance use for those with greater medial prefrontal cortex activation during cognitive control, but it was related to lower substance use among those with lower medial prefrontal cortex activation during cognitive control. Neural processes related to risk processing and cognitive control play a crucial role in the processes linking risk taking, peer substance use, and adolescents’ own substance use.

scholarly journals Cognitive Control as a Moderator of Temperamental Motivations Toward Adolescent Risk-Taking Behavior

2016 ◽  
Vol 87 (2) ◽  
pp. 395-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
George J. Youssef ◽  
Sarah Whittle ◽  
Nicholas B. Allen ◽  
Dan I. Lubman ◽  
Julian G. Simmons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Risk Taking Behavior

scholarly journals Is the impact of high reward sensitivity and poor cognitive control on adolescent risk-taking more visible in rewarding conditions?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanna Fryt ◽  
Tomasz Smoleń ◽  
Karolina Czernecka ◽  
Monika Szczygieł ◽  
Amelia La Torre
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Reward Sensitivity ◽  
The Self ◽  
Self Control ◽  
Self Report ◽  
High Reward ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Driving Task ◽  
The Impact

AbstractAdolescents are expected to take more risks than adults. The presented study was designed to determine whether adolescent risk-taking results from high reward sensitivity and poor cognitive control. In particular, we aimed to examine whether the impact of these variables is more visible in rewarding than non-rewarding conditions. Ninety adolescents (aged 13–16) and 95 young adults (aged 20–28) took part in the study. We used a driving task in rewarded and non-rewarded conditions to measure risk-taking. We also used tasks measuring reward sensitivity, cognitive control and impulsivity. Additionally we used self-report measures of reward sensitivity, self-control and everyday risk-taking to see whether the effects observed for self-reports mimic the effects observed for behavioral tasks. We found that the higher the reward sensitivity, the more adolescents (but not adults) risk in the rewarded condition of a driving task. We found no impact of cognitive control or impulsivity on risk-taking, regardless of age and condition. At the self-report level, we found that the higher the reward sensitivity and the poorer the self-control, the more both adolescents and adults displayed everyday risk-taking behavior.

scholarly journals Frontostriatal Maturation Predicts Cognitive Control Failure to Appetitive Cues in Adolescents

2011 ◽  
Vol 23 (9) ◽  
pp. 2123-2134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leah H. Somerville ◽  
Todd Hare ◽  
B. J. Casey
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Impulse Control ◽  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Dorsal Striatum ◽  
Public Health Issue ◽  
Prefrontal Cortical ◽  
Enhanced Sensitivity ◽  
Adolescent Risk ◽  
Appetitive Cues

Adolescent risk-taking is a public health issue that increases the odds of poor lifetime outcomes. One factor thought to influence adolescents' propensity for risk-taking is an enhanced sensitivity to appetitive cues, relative to an immature capacity to exert sufficient cognitive control. We tested this hypothesis by characterizing interactions among ventral striatal, dorsal striatal, and prefrontal cortical regions with varying appetitive load using fMRI scanning. Child, teen, and adult participants performed a go/no-go task with appetitive (happy faces) and neutral cues (calm faces). Impulse control to neutral cues showed linear improvement with age, whereas teens showed a nonlinear reduction in impulse control to appetitive cues. This performance decrement in teens was paralleled by enhanced activity in the ventral striatum. Prefrontal cortical recruitment correlated with overall accuracy and showed a linear response with age for no-go versus go trials. Connectivity analyses identified a ventral frontostriatal circuit including the inferior frontal gyrus and dorsal striatum during no-go versus go trials. Examining recruitment developmentally showed that teens had greater between-subject ventral-dorsal striatal coactivation relative to children and adults for happy no-go versus go trials. These findings implicate exaggerated ventral striatal representation of appetitive cues in adolescents relative to an intermediary cognitive control response. Connectivity and coactivity data suggest these systems communicate at the level of the dorsal striatum differentially across development. Biased responding in this system is one possible mechanism underlying heightened risk-taking during adolescence.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document