Emotion regulation and brain plasticity: Expressive suppression use predicts anterior insula volume

Abstract

Expressive suppression is an emotion regulation strategy that requires interoceptive and emotional awareness. These processes both recruit the anterior insula. It is not known, however, whether increased use of expressive suppression is associated with increased anterior insula volume. In the present study, high-resolution anatomical MRI images were used to calculate insula volumes in a set of 50 healthy female subjects (mean 21.9 years) using both region of interest (ROI) and voxel-based morphometry (VBM) approaches. Participants also completed trait measures of expressive suppression usage, cognitive reappraisal usage, and negative emotional reactivity (the latter two served as control measures). As predicted, both ROI and VBM methods found that expressive suppression usage, but not negative affect and cognitive reappraisal, was positively related to anterior insula volume. These findings are consistent with the idea that trait patterns of emotion processing are related to brain structure.

Expressive suppression and neural responsiveness to nonverbal affective cues

“…Moreover, suppressors are reportedly more likely to allow their currently experienced mood states to impact their decision making (e.g., evaluation of commercial products, which are unrelated to the suppressors' current affective state, Hess, Beale, & Miles, 2010), in line with the conjecture that habitual use of expressive suppression may render inner states particularly salient. Indeed, compatible with this line of reasoning and with the notion of use-dependent brain plasticity (Kleim, Barbay, & Nudo, 1998;Kleim et al, 2002), a recent study documented a significant positive association between habitual use of expressive suppression and volume of the anterior insula, a brain region that is critically involved in inner state awareness (Giuliani, Drabant, Bhatnagar, & Gross, 2011).…”

“…Moreover, suppressors are reportedly more likely to allow their currently experienced mood states to impact their decision making (e.g., evaluation of commercial products, which are unrelated to the suppressors' current affective state, Hess, Beale, & Miles, 2010), in line with the conjecture that habitual use of expressive suppression may render inner states particularly salient. Indeed, compatible with this line of reasoning and with the notion of use-dependent brain plasticity (Kleim, Barbay, & Nudo, 1998;Kleim et al, 2002), a recent study documented a significant positive association between habitual use of expressive suppression and volume of the anterior insula, a brain region that is critically involved in inner state awareness (Giuliani, Drabant, Bhatnagar, & Gross, 2011).Documenting a link between habitual expressive suppression use and increased sensitivity to the affective states of others would have the potential to illuminate the determinants of the poorer cognitive performance, evidenced by suppressors, particularly in social situations (Richards et al, 2003;Richards & Gross, 2006). Indeed, if increased sensitivity to nonverbal affective cues depends upon deployment of cognitive control resources, then the suppressors' preferential processing of nonverbal affective information in social situations may be partly to blame for their reduced processing of emotionally unrelated information (Richards et al, 2003;Richards & Gross, 2006).…”

“…Specifically, suppressors' greater processing of nonverbal cues was linked to increased activity in brain areas underlying interoceptive awareness and resonance with the visceral states of others (i.e., insula, dACC, cf. Giuliani et al, 2011;Zaki & Ochsner, 2012), affective responses to both positive and negative stimuli (i.e., putamen, cf. Philips et al, 2003;Surguladze et al, 2005), as well as areas involved in judging one's own emotions, as well as the emotions of others based on visual stimuli (i.e., posterior cingulate cortex, Ochsner et al, 2004;Zaki et al, 2010).…”

“…Such an account would complement existing theory and research that the suppressors' perpetual monitoring of their own internal states diminishes the amount of cognitive resources that suppressors have available during social encounters (cf. Giuliani et al, 2011).Moreover, showing a link between chronic expressive suppression use and increased sensitivity to nonverbal affective information may pave the way for investigations on the factors that may reinforce the use of suppression as a preferred emotion regulation strategy, despite its adverse socioaffective consequences (e.g., Gross & John, 2003). It is noteworthy that of all the aspects of an emotional response, it is behavioral expression that constitutes the focus of suppressors' regulatory efforts (Gross & John, 2003).…”

“…Such an account would complement existing theory and research that the suppressors' perpetual monitoring of their own internal states diminishes the amount of cognitive resources that suppressors have available during social encounters (cf. Giuliani et al, 2011).…”