No abstract

The Balloon Analog Risk Task (BART) is increasingly used to assess risk-taking behavior and brain function. However, the brain networks underlying risk-taking during the BART and its reliability remain controversial. Here, we combined the activation likelihood estimation (ALE) meta-analysis with both task-based and task-free functional connectivity (FC) analysis to quantitatively synthesize brain networks involved in risktaking during the BART, and compared the differences between adults and adolescents studies. Based on 22 pooled publications, the ALE meta-analysis revealed multiple brain regions in the reward network, salience network, and executive control network underlying risk-taking during the BART. Compared with adult risk-taking, adolescent risk-taking showed greater activation in the insula, putamen, and prefrontal regions. The combination of meta-analytic connectivity modeling with task-free FC analysis further confirmed the involvement of the reward, salience, and cognitive control networks in the BART. These findings demonstrate the core brain networks for risk-taking during the BART and support the utility of the BART for future neuroimaging and developmental research.

Purpose Sleep loss impairs a range of neurobehavioral functions, particularly vigilant attention and arousal. However, the detrimental effects of sleep deprivation on inhibition control and its relationship to vigilant attention impairments remain unclear. This study examined the extent to which vigilant attention deficits contribute to inhibition control performance after one night of total sleep deprivation (TSD) and two nights of partial sleep restriction (PSR). Participants and Methods We analyzed data from N = 49 participants in a one-night of TSD experiment, N=16 participants in a control experiment without sleep loss, and N = 16 participants in a two-nights of PSR experiment (time in bed, TIB = 6 h for each night). Throughout waking periods in each condition, participants completed the psychomotor vigilance test (PVT), which measures vigilant attention, and the Go/No-Go task, which measures inhibition control. Results After TSD and PSR, participants displayed significantly slower reaction times (RT) and more lapses in PVT performance, as well as slower Go RT and more errors of omission during the Go/No-Go task. PVT deficits accounted for 18.0% of the change in Go RT and 12.4% of the change in errors of omission in the TSD study, and 23.7% of the change in Go RT and 20.3% of the change in errors of omission in the PSR study. Conclusion Both TSD and PSR impaired inhibition control during the Go/No-Go task, which can be partly accounted for by vigilant attention deficits during the PVT. These findings support the key role of vigilant attention in maintaining overall neurobehavioral function after sleep loss.

No abstract