Altered time course of amygdala activation during speech anticipation in social anxiety disorder

Abstract

Background Exaggerated anticipatory anxiety is common in social anxiety disorder (SAD). Neuroimaging studies have revealed altered neural activity in response to social stimuli in SAD, but fewer studies have examined neural activity during anticipation of feared social stimuli in SAD. The current study examined the time course and magnitude of activity in threat processing brain regions during speech anticipation in socially anxious individuals and healthy controls (HC). Method Participants (SAD n = 58; HC n = 16) underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) during which they completed a 90s control anticipation task and 90s speech anticipation task. Repeated measures multi-level modeling analyses were used to examine group differences in time course activity during speech vs. control anticipation for regions of interest, including bilateral amygdala, insula, ventral striatum, and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex. Results The time course of amygdala activity was more prolonged and less variable throughout speech anticipation in SAD participants compared to HCs, whereas the overall magnitude of amygdala response did not differ between groups. Magnitude and time course of activity was largely similar between groups across other regions of interest. Limitations Analyses were restricted to regions of interest and task order was the same across participants due to the nature of deception instructions. Conclusions Sustained amygdala time course during anticipation may uniquely reflect heightened detection of threat or deficits in emotion regulation in socially anxious individuals. Findings highlight the importance of examining temporal dynamics of amygdala responding.

Transdiagnostic neural correlates of volitional emotion regulation in anxiety and depression

“…The failure to find group differences in the amygdala replicates prior work using a similarly crafted large, trans-diagnostic sample of GAD, SAD, and MDD participants during exposure to negative stimuli but outside the context of reappraisal . In addition, although numerous prior studies report overactive amygdala in response to varied negative stimuli (e.g., scenes, faces, and words), there are also number of studies that fail to find such effects in those with GAD and SAD (Blair et al, 2008;Burklund, Torre, Lieberman, Taylor, & Craske, 2017;Davies et al, 2017;Etkin, Prater, Hoeft, Menon, & Schatzberg, 2010;Mochcovitch, da Rocha Freire, Garcia, & Nardi, 2014;Nakao et al, 2011;Palm, Elliott, McKie, Deakin, & Anderson, 2011;Strawn et al, 2012;Whalen et al, 2008) or MDD (Almeida, Versace, Hassel, Kupfer, & Phillips, 2010;Beauregard et al, 2006;Davidson, Irwin, Anderle, & Kalin, 2003;Grimm et al, 2008;Irwin et al, 2004;Lawrence et al, 2004;Townsend et al, 2010). Lack of amygdala differentiation between patients and controls is also consistent with prior studies that did not find amygdala differences between HCs and those with GAD or HCs and those with MDD (Erk et al, 2010) during reappraisal specifically.…”

“…Torre, Lieberman, Taylor, & Craske, 2017;Davies et al, 2017;Etkin, Prater, Hoeft, Menon, & Schatzberg, 2010;Mochcovitch, da Rocha Freire, Garcia, & Nardi, 2014;Nakao et al, 2011;Palm, Elliott, McKie, Deakin, & Anderson, 2011;Strawn et al, 2012;Whalen et al, 2008) or MDD(Almeida, Versace, Hassel, Kupfer, & Phillips, 2010;Beauregard et al, 2006;Davidson, Irwin, Anderle, & Kalin, 2003; …”

Measuring the quality of scientific references in Wikipedia: an analysis of more than 115M citations to over 800 000 scientific articles

“…According to scite [15], this reference has received 259 mentioning citation statements, 23 supporting citation statements, and 3 contradicting citation statements (Figure 2). Thus, while some have provided supporting evidence, two studies have called this into question, with one report stating [16], "These findings do not replicate previous studies..." The citation context offers a more complete picture, potentially affecting decisions by everyday readers and choices of editors. Consider the Wikipedia article "Suicide and Internet" which features the following statement, "A survey has found that suicide-risk individuals who went online for suicide-related purposes, compared with online users who did not, reported greater suicide-risk symptoms, were less likely to seek remainder were technical datasheets, books, tables, and other items not typically subject to independent replication or verification.…”

Measuring the quality of scientific references in Wikipedia: an analysis of more than 115M citations to over 800,000 scientific articles

“…According to scite [8] , this reference has received 226 mentioning citation statements, 23 supporting citation statements, and 2 contradicting citation statements ( Figure 2). Thus, while some have provided supporting evidence, two studies have called this into question, with one report stating [9] , "These findings do not replicate previous studies..." The citation context offers more than just a complete picture; it potentially affects decisions by everyday readers. Consider the Wikipedia article "Suicide and Internet" which features the following statement, "A survey has found that suicide-risk individuals who went online for suicide-related purposes, compared with online users who did not, reported greater suicide-risk symptoms, were less likely to seek help and perceived less social support," highlighting a report by Harris, McLean, and Sheffield [10] .…”