Developing a neurobehavioral animal model of poverty: Drawing cross-species connections between environments of scarcity-adversity, parenting quality, and infant outcome

Abstract

Children reared in impoverished environments are at risk for enduring psychological and physical health problems. Mechanisms by which poverty affects development, however, remain unclear. To explore one potential mechanism of poverty's impact on social-emotional and cognitive development, an experimental examination of a rodent model of scarcity-adversity was conducted and compared to results from a longitudinal study of human infants and families followed from birth (N = 1,292) who faced high levels of poverty-related scarcity-adversity. Cross-species results supported the hypothesis that altered caregiving is one pathway by which poverty adversely impacts development. Rodent mothers assigned to the scarcity-adversity condition exhibited decreased sensitive parenting and increased negative parenting relative to mothers assigned to the control condition. Furthermore, scarcity-adversity reared pups exhibited decreased developmental competence as indicated by disrupted nipple attachment, distress vocalization when in physical contact with an anesthetized mother, and reduced preference for maternal odor with corresponding changes in brain activation. Human results indicated that scarcity-adversity was inversely correlated with sensitive parenting and positively correlated with negative parenting, and that parenting fully mediated the association of poverty-related risk with infant indicators of developmental competence. Findings are discussed from the perspective of the usefulness of bidirectional-translational research to inform interventions for at-risk families.

Socioeconomic disadvantage, brain morphometry, and attentional bias to threat in middle childhood

“…It is important to note, however, that animal models cannot capture all aspects of the experience of SED (Hackman, Farah, & Meaney, 2010;Thapar & Rutter, 2015) and should always be interpreted with caution. However, currently they are useful to inform human studies about cause and effect relationships between SED and the brain (Perry et al, 2018).…”

Preventing epigenetic traces of caregiver maltreatment: A role for HDAC inhibition

“…Pups were randomly assigned to either the maltreatment, cross‐foster care, or normal‐care condition. In the maltreatment condition, pups were exposed to a lactating dam who had been placed in a novel environment with limited nesting material and no time to habituate to her environment, conditions which elicit stress‐induced, erratic and aversive caregiving behaviors (Ivy et al, 2008; Perry et al, 2019; Raineki et al, 2010; Roth et al, 2009). In the cross‐foster care condition, pups were similarly exposed to a lactating dam who had been placed in a novel environment, but provided with ample nesting material and plenty of time to habituate (approximately 1 h).…”

Using a Developmental Ecology Framework to Align Fear Neurobiology Across Species

“…One factor that greatly influences emotional functioning and anxiety across development is the family unit. As recognized long ago by theorists such as Urie Bronfenbrenner (1977) and John Bowlby (1969), caregivers are the essential unit driving children's behavioral as well as neural development, especially within emotion domains (for reviews see Callaghan & Tottenham 2016a, Gunnar et al 2015, Perry et al 2018. For example, parents both buffer (i.e., downregulate) and amplify (i.e., upregulate) children's fear responses, depending on their own emotional output (Eisenberg et al 1998, Gunnar et al 2015.…”