Clarifying domains of internalizing psychopathology using neurophysiology

Vaidyanathan, Uma; Nelson, Lindsay D.; Patrick, Christopher J.

doi:10.1017/s0033291711001528

Cited by 69 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 102 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One of the most robust findings in the error monitoring literature is an enhanced ERN/Ne component in participants with high trait negative affect (see Moser et al, 2013;Olvet and Hajcak, 2008;Simons, 2010;Vaidyanathan et al, 2012). Using standard interference tasks, several ERP studies have reported greater ERN/Ne (and often CRN) components in patients with anxiety or internalizing disorders (Krueger et al, 2001), including obsessive compulsive disorders (Carrasco et al, 2006;Endrass et al, 2008;Endrass et al, 2010;Gehring et al, 2000;Hajcak and Simons, 2002;Johannes et al, 2001;Stern et al, 2010), depression (Aarts et al, in press), and generalized anxiety disorders (Weinberg et al, 2010).…”

Section: Evidence From Individual Differences and Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Koban

Pourtois

2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

155

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(max 170 words)Action monitoring allows the swift detection of conflicts, errors, and the rapid evaluation of outcomes. These processes are crucial for learning, adaptive behavior, and for the regulation of cognitive control. Our review discusses neuroimaging and electrophysiological studies that have explored the contribution of emotional and social factors during action monitoring. Metaanalytic brain activation maps demonstrate reliable overlap of error monitoring, emotional, and social processes in the dorsal mediofrontal cortex (dMFC), lateral prefrontal areas, and anterior insula (AI). Cumulating evidence suggests that action monitoring is modulated by trait anxiety and negative affect, and that activity of the dMFC and the amygdala during action monitoring might contribute to the 'affective tagging' of actions along a valence dimension. The role of AI in action monitoring may be the integration of outcome information with self-agency and social context factors, thereby generating more complex situation-specific and conscious emotional feeling states. Our review suggests that action-monitoring processes operate at multiple levels in the human brain, and are shaped by dynamic interactions with affective and social processes.Keywords: Anterior insula; dorsal cingulate cortex; mediofrontal cortex; amygdala; error monitoring; ERN; feedback processing; social cognition; emotions; cognitive control; emotioncognition interactions; meta-analysis 3 Overview and motivationIn order to adapt their behavior, to detect and learn from errors, and ultimately to increase their chances of survival, humans and other animals have to monitor their actions (Rabbitt, 1966). Flexible regulation of behavior requires its constant evaluation in terms of performance and outcomes, as well as in terms of costs and future consequences. Action and error monitoring have been studied for several decades in psychology and neuroscience (for previous reviews see (Etkin et al., 2011;Moser et al., 2013;Pessoa, 2008;Proudfit et al., 2013;Shackman et al., 2011;Shenhav et al., 2013), we propose that error and action monitoring is an intrinsically affective and social process. However, we show that meta-analytic activation maps support overlapping brain responses to error processing, emotional, and social information processing not only in dMFC, but also in several other brain regions, including anterior insula and lateral prefrontal cortex.Further, recent intracranial electrophysiological recordings showed error-related activity in the amygdala, suggesting this limbic region may contribute to affective responses to errors and negative action outcomes. In the closing part, we outline an integrative framework for 4 understanding the brain systems underlying affective and social interactions with action monitoring, which may be crucial to foster behavioral control in real life.

show abstract

Section: Evidence From Individual Differences and Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Koban

Pourtois

2014

Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

155

159

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The two factors function as the main pathways for lifetime comorbidity, persistence of disorders, and familial transmission of psychopathology (Eaton et al, 2013b;Kessler et al, 2011;Starr, Conway, Hammen, & Brennan, 2014). In line with initiatives such as RDoC (Caspi et al, in press;Insel, et al, 2010), and in light of their properties and links with genetic and neurobiological substrates of behavior (Kendler et al, 2011;Vaidyanathan, Patrick, & Cuthbert, 2009;Vaidyanathan, Nelson, & Patrick, 2012), these sources of transdiagnostic disorder variance and comorbidity are becoming a growing focus of scientific inquiry and clinical intervention (e.g., Barlow et al, 2011;Barlow et al, 2014;Rodriguez-Seijas, Eaton, & Krueger, in press). …”

Section: Accepted Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

Transdiagnostic psychopathology mediates the relationship between childhood sexual abuse and HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections in adulthood

Latack

Rodriguez‐Seijas

Stohl³

et al. 2015

Comprehensive Psychiatry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…In a follow up study, Vaidyanathan, Nelson, and Patrick (2012) applied the same strategy to another index of neurophysiology, the ERN (an event-related potential waveform sensitive to error commisThis document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.…”

Section: Connecting Mechanisms To Palpable Psychopathologymentioning

confidence: 99%

Connecting psychopathology meta-structure and mechanisms.

Sanislow

2016

Journal of Abnormal Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A persistent challenge for the field of psychopathology has been how to best explain mental disorders and organize clinical symptoms into diagnoses. Meta-structural approaches have clarified fundamental problems and made substantial gains by using covariance structures to organize the nature of clinical symptom patterns. A remaining task is how to specify the connections between these patterns across behavioral, cognitive, and neural mechanisms. Together, meta-structural approaches and the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) offer a means to parse out these connections. I comment on the included articles in this special section on psychopathology meta-structure and argue that core dimensions of psychopathology identified with meta-structural approaches can advance the RDoC initiative and that the RDoC framework, in turn, can strengthen structural approaches by providing an organizational scaffold to elucidate the relations of behavioral, cognitive, and neural mechanisms and to relate them to dimensions of human suffering and dysfunction. General Scientific SummaryThe Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project was initiated by the National Institute of Mental Health to facilitate research on mental disorders by providing a new ways to understand connections of problems in the brain and body with clinical symptoms and distress. The aim is to improve the diagnosis of mental disorders, and facilitate the development of better treatments. In this commentary, ways that RDoC and statistical approaches to complement each other to better understand mental disorders complement are described.Keywords: RDoC, diagnosis, mechanisms, meta-structure, NIMH It is a pleasure to have the opportunity to comment on the articles included in this special section in Abnormal Psychology on the meta-structure of psychopathology. This is an important and timely topic. Structural approaches to psychopathology have been pivotal for moving clinical research forward, for helping to address the pervasive problem of comorbidity, and for moving the field toward dimensional conceptualizations of psychopathology. RDoC is of particular significance to this special section because findings from meta-structure studies of psychopathology were a cornerstone rationale for its development. In what follows, the theoretical perspective of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) is offered in the context of commentary on the special section articles.Both RDoC and structural approaches are motivated by problems with descriptively derived diagnoses (e.g., diagnostic overlap, comorbidity, narrow constraints, arbitrary cut points, heterogeneity), but RDoC expressly grapples with the problem that mechanisms from integrative neuroscience (e.g., cognitive control, emotion regulation, reward processing) did not map neatly onto clinical syndromes. Metastructural research has clarified broad (e.g., internalizing) and specific (e.g., fear) dimensions of psychological and behavioral problems usef...

show abstract

Clarifying domains of internalizing psychopathology using neurophysiology

Cited by 69 publications

References 102 publications

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Brain systems underlying the affective and social monitoring of actions: An integrative review

Transdiagnostic psychopathology mediates the relationship between childhood sexual abuse and HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted infections in adulthood

Connecting psychopathology meta-structure and mechanisms.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About