Neural Mechanisms Associated with Semantic and Basic Self-Oriented Memory Processes Interact to Modulate Self-Esteem

Abstract

Individuals constantly encounter feedback from others and process this feedback in various ways to maintain positive situational state self-esteem (SSE) in relation to semantic-based or trait self-esteem (TSE). Individuals may utilize a data-driven, or episodic-based process that encodes positive, but not negative, self-relevant information automatically, or employ a semantic-driven process that manipulates encoded negative feedback post-hoc. It’s unclear, however, how these processes work either alone or in concert while individuals receive positive and negative feedback to modulate feedback encoding and subsequent SSE. Utilizing neural regions associated with semantic self-oriented and basic encoding processes (mPFC and PCC respectively), and time-frequency and Granger causality analyses to assess mPFC and PCC interactions, this study examined how encoding of positive and negative self-relevant feedback modulated individuals’ post-task SSE in relation to their TSE while continuous EEG was recorded. Among those with higher levels of TSE, the encoding of positive or negative feedback was not associated with SSE. Rather, higher SSE was associated with mPFC activity to all feedback and higher TSE. The relationship between TSE and SSE was moderated by mPFC-PCC communication such that increases in mPFC-PCC communication led to SSE levels that were consistent with TSE levels. Furthermore, Granger causality analyses indicated that individuals exhibited higher SSE to the extent mPFC influenced PCC in response to positive and negative feedback. Findings highlight the dynamic interplay between semantic self-oriented and basic encoding processes that modulate SSE in relation to TSE, to maintain more positive global selfperceptions in the moment and over time.

Context matters: Situational stress impedes functional reorganization of intrinsic brain connectivity during problem solving

“…Other frequent terms included "TOM" (theory of mind), "intentions", and "mental state", as well as "visual" and "spatial attention". We observed the broad trend that edges appeared to reflect links between functions that revolve around internally oriented processing (self or social cognition; Amey et al, 2018) and those that typically relate to problem-solving (visuospatial attention, calculation, and responding; e.g. Anderson et al 2014).…”

The role of startle fluctuation and non-response startle reflex in tracking amygdala dynamics

“…Amygdala activity has been shown to orchestrate whole brain dynamics in the presence of a threat, such as a startle probe, as it is often described as a regulator of the stress response and a hub for emotional processing . For example, medial temporal cortex activity has been shown to be directly linked to amygdala activity (Liu et al, 2015;Amey et al, 2018). This activity has been consistently implicated in perception and response to the danger and threat (LeDoux, 1996;Williams & Gordon, 2007;Eldawud et al, 2016).…”

How the brain negotiates divergent executive processing demands: Evidence of network reorganization during fleeting brain states

“…one state) may be counterproductive if "leaking" into other stages. Indeed, in the case of arousal or stress during performance, ill-timed activation of emotion or self-related brain regions during problem solving is precisely what is conceptualized to undermine performance (van Ast et al, 2016;Amey et al, 2018). This is also reflected in work associating stress during performance with too many or too few network states, to the decrement of performance outcomes Anderson et al, 2011).…”