A growing body of research has examined the impact of childhood adversity on neural structure and function. Advances in our understanding of the neurodevelopmental consequences of adverse early environments require the identification of dimensions of environmental experience that influence neural development differently and mechanisms other than the frequently-invoked stress pathways. We propose a novel conceptual framework that differentiates between deprivation (absence of expected environmental inputs and complexity) and threat (presence of experiences that represent a threat to one’s physical integrity) and make predictions grounded in basic neuroscience principles about their distinct effects on neural development. We review animal research on fear learning and sensory deprivation as well as human research on childhood adversity and neural development to support these predictions. We argue that these previously undifferentiated dimensions of experience exert strong and distinct influences on neural development that cannot be fully explained by prevailing models focusing only on stress pathways. Our aim is not to exhaustively review existing evidence on childhood adversity and neural development, but to provide a novel framework to guide future research.

A review of the human developmental neuroimaging literature that investigates outcomes following exposure to psychosocial adversity is presented with a focus on two subcortical structures – the hippocampus and the amygdala. Throughout this review, we discuss how a consideration of developmental timing of adverse experiences and age at measurement might provide insight into the seemingly discrepant findings across studies. We use findings from animal studies to suggest some mechanisms through which timing of experiences may result in differences across time and studies. The literature suggests that early life may be a time of heightened susceptibility to environmental stressors, but that expression of these effects will vary by age at measurement.

Temporal structure has a major role in human understanding of everyday events. Observers are able to segment ongoing activity into temporal parts and sub-parts that are reliable, meaningful and correlated with ecologically relevant features of the action. Here we present evidence that a network of brain regions is tuned to perceptually salient event boundaries, both during intentional event segmentation and during naive passive viewing of events. Activity within this network may provide a basis for parsing the temporally evolving environment into meaningful units.

Over the past decade, a growing area of research has focused on adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) and their impacts on neural and developmental outcomes. Work in the field to-date has generally conceptualized ACEs in terms of exposure to stress while overlooking the underlying dimensions of environmental experience that may distinctly impact neural development. We propose a novel framework that differentiates between deprivation (absence of expected cognitive and social input) and threat (presence of a threat to one’s physical integrity). We draw support for the neural basis of this distinction from studies on fear learning and sensory deprivation in animals to highlight potential mechanisms through which experiences of threat and deprivation could come to effect neural structure and function in humans.

The association between family socioeconomic status (SES) and child executive functions is well-documented. However, few studies have examined the role of potential mediators and moderators. We studied the independent and interactive associations between family SES and single parenthood to predict child executive functions of inhibitory control, cognitive flexibility, and working memory and examined child expressive language abilities and family home environment as potential mediators of these associations. Sixty families from diverse SES backgrounds with a school-age target child (mean [SD] age = 9.9 [0.96] years) were evaluated. Child executive functioning was measured using a brief battery. The quality of the home environment was evaluated using the Home Observation for the Measurement of the Environment inventory. Family SES predicted the three child executive functions under study. Single parent and family SES were interactively associated with children's inhibitory control and cognitive flexibility; such that children from low SES families who were living with one parent performed less well on executive function tests than children from similarly low SES who were living with two parents. Parental responsivity, enrichment activities and family companionship mediated the association between family SES and child inhibitory control and working memory. This study demonstrates that family SES inequalities are associated with inequalities in home environments and with inequalities in child executive functions. The impact of these disparities as they unfold in the lives of typically developing children merits further investigation and understanding.

Disruptions in stress response system functioning are thought to be a central mechanism by which exposure to adverse early-life environments influences human development. Although early-life adversity results in hyperreactivity of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in rodents, evidence from human studies is inconsistent. We present results from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project examining whether randomized placement into a family caregiving environment alters development of the autonomic nervous system and HPA axis in children exposed to early-life deprivation associated with institutional rearing. Electrocardiogram, impedance cardiograph, and neuroendocrine data were collected during laboratorybased challenge tasks from children (mean age = 12.9 y) raised in deprived institutional settings in Romania randomized to a highquality foster care intervention (n = 48) or to remain in care as usual (n = 43) and a sample of typically developing Romanian children (n = 47). Children who remained in institutional care exhibited significantly blunted SNS and HPA axis responses to psychosocial stress compared with children randomized to foster care, whose stress responses approximated those of typically developing children. Intervention effects were evident for cortisol and parasympathetic nervous system reactivity only among children placed in foster care before age 24 and 18 months, respectively, providing experimental evidence of a sensitive period in humans during which the environment is particularly likely to alter stress response system development. We provide evidence for a causal link between the early caregiving environment and stress response system reactivity in humans with effects that differ markedly from those observed in rodent models.childhood adversity | early-life stress | HPA axis | autonomic nervous system | stress reactivity D isruptions in stress response system functioning are thought to be a central mechanism by which exposure to adverse early-life environments influences human development. This idea is borne out in rodent models, where the effects of early-life adversity on the development of stress response systems have been well characterized. Exposure to early-life adversityinvolving repeated and prolonged separation of a pup from its mother-results in hyperreactivity of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis in adolescence and adulthood and elevations in anxiety, fearful behaviors, and hypervigilance (1-4). Stress exposure in mature rodents is associated with immediate, but not lasting, changes in stress response systems (5, 6), suggesting the presence of an early sensitive period when exposure to adverse environments results in long-term changes in physiological stress response system functioning.

We used structural MRI and EEG to examine brain structure and function in typically developing children in Romania (n = 20), children exposed to institutional rearing (n = 29), and children previously exposed to institutional rearing but then randomized to a high-quality foster care intervention (n = 25). In so doing, we provide a unique evaluation of whether placement in an improved environment mitigates the effects of institutional rearing on neural structure, using data from the only existing randomized controlled trial of foster care for institutionalized children. Children enrolled in the Bucharest Early Intervention Project underwent a T1-weighted MRI protocol. Children with histories of institutional rearing had significantly smaller cortical gray matter volume than never-institutionalized children. Cortical white matter was no different for children placed in foster care than never-institutionalized children but was significantly smaller for children not randomized to foster care. We were also able to explain previously reported reductions in EEG α-power among institutionally reared children compared with children raised in families using these MRI data. As hypothesized, the association between institutionalization and EEG α-power was partially mediated by cortical white matter volume for children not randomized to foster care. The increase in white matter among children randomized to an improved rearing environment relative to children who remained in institutional care suggests the potential for developmental "catch up" in white matter growth, even following extreme environmental deprivation.neglect | brain development | early adversity | brain volume | early experience A common societal response to orphaned or abandoned children is to rear such children in institutions (1, 2). UNICEF estimates that there are at least 8 million children who live in institutional settings. Institutional rearing of young children represents a severe form of early psychological and physical neglect, and as such, serves as a model system for understanding how early experience-or the lack of thereof-impacts brain and behavioral development.In most forms of institutional rearing, the ratio of caregiversto-children is low (e.g., in our sample ∼1:12), care is highly regimented, and caregiver investment in children is low (3). Children raised in institutions are more likely than children raised in families to have deficits in cognitive function (4, 5) and in language production and comprehension (6, 7). Relative to noninstitutionalized children, children reared in institutional settings experience a wide range of developmental problems including markedly elevated rates of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and other forms of psychopathology (8-10) and difficulties with social functioning (11-13). These developmental difficulties are not unique among children exposed to institutionalization. Indeed, exposure to a wide range of adverse early environments-including physical and sexual abuse, neglect, domestic violence, and c...

Children who have experienced environmental adversity—such as abuse, neglect, or poverty—are more likely to develop physical and mental health problems, perform poorly at school, and have difficulties in social relationships than children who have not encountered adversity. What is less clear is how and why adverse early experiences exert such a profound influence on children’s development. Identifying developmental processes that are disrupted by adverse early environments is the key to developing better intervention strategies for children who have experienced adversity. Yet, much existing research relies on a cumulative risk approach that is unlikely to reveal these mechanisms. This approach tallies the number of distinct adversities experienced to create a risk score. This risk score fails to distinguish between distinct types of environmental experience, implicitly assuming that very different experiences influence development through the same underlying mechanisms. We advance an alternative model. This novel approach conceptualizes adversity along distinct dimensions, emphasizes the central role of learning mechanisms, and distinguishes between different forms of adversity that might influence learning in distinct ways. A key advantage of this approach is that learning mechanisms provide clear targets for interventions aimed at preventing negative developmental outcomes in children who have experienced adversity.