Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2018-10
  • 2018-11
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • Collapsed across groups vACC activation did

    2018-11-01

    Collapsed across groups, vACC activation did not show a significant correlation with age (r(48)=0.23, p=0.1). However, when assessing these correlations in each group separately, activation in the vACC ROI sphere correlated significantly with age in TD youth (r(17)=0.464, p=0.045), but not UAS or ASD groups (p\'s>0.3). Developmental effects on buy Digoxigenin-11-ddUTP responses to social exclusion in the TD participants of the current study have been reported elsewhere (Bolling et al., 2011a). The current study has several limitations. First, the study design utilized a baseline condition (Fair Play) in order to maximize experimental specificity within our construct of interest (Social Exclusion). Utilizing a control condition of Fair Play (social inclusion) in contrast to Social Exclusion is standard for fMRI studies using a Cyberball manipulation (Cacioppo et al., 2013). This contrast is ideal, given that the two conditions differ minimally except for the variable of interest (rejection). Consequently, all results where we demonstrate hypoactivation to social exclusion could alternatively be interpreted as hyperactivation to fair play. However, the directionality in the current presentation of the results is precedented by previous research. Second, the limited sample size of the current investigation makes it difficult to detect significant group differences. Brain regions where TD and UAS differed in activation to social exclusion were subjected to a secondary analysis where activation in children with ASD was compared to TD and UAS groups in order to determine which region(s) showed a pattern of “trait” activation. We presented results that were uncorrected for the number of regions (8) which we analyzed in this way. Thus, we interpret our results cautiously, in order to generate hypotheses about the nature of social cognition in UAS. Similarly, IQ correlations were also limited in sample size and as such must be taken as propositional information, rather than confirmatory evidence. Finally, due to the anatomical variability in TPJ activation in studies of social cognition, it is difficult to make inferences about the psychological correlates of our temporal lobe activations. Thus, the interpretations discussed should not be considered an exhaustive list of the possible explanations for the current study\'s findings.
    Conclusions
    Conflict of interest
    Acknowledgments The research presented was supported by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH084080), the John Merck Scholars fund, and the Simons Foundation. DZB was supported by NINDS T32 training grant (T32 NS07224).