Neural correlates of successful emotion recognition in healthy elderly: a multimodal imaging study

Abstract

The ageing process is associated with reduced emotional recognition (ER) performance. The ER ability is an essential part of non-verbal communication, and its role is crucial for proper social functioning. Here, using the ‘Cambridge Centre for Ageing and Neuroscience cohort sample’, we investigated when ER, measured using a facial emotion recognition test, begins to consistently decrease along the lifespan. Moreover, using structural and functional MRI data, we identified the neural correlates associated with ER maintenance in the age groups showing early signs of ER decline (N = 283; age range: 58–89 years). The ER performance was positively correlated with greater volume in the superior parietal lobule, higher white matter integrity in the corpus callosum and greater functional connectivity in the mid-cingulate area. Our results suggest that higher ER accuracy in older people is associated with preserved gray and white matter volumes in cognitive or interconnecting areas, subserving brain regions directly involved in emotional processing.

Aging modulates frontal lobes involvement in emotion regulation processing

“…Participants were divided in two groups based on their age: younger/middle aged (18 < x < 58 years old) and older adults (58 < = x < 89 years old). The rationale for this was two‐fold: (1) in a recently published manuscript, evaluating age‐related changes in a facial emotion recognition test across the life span, we have observed reduced performance in the facial emotion recognition ability in participants older than 58 years old, whereas performance in participants younger than 58 years old was not altered (Orlando et al., 2023); (2) previous studies investigating ER ability used an age cut‐off very close to ours to differentiate younger and older participants (Winecoff et al., 2011, 2013).…”

Phenotyping in clinical laterality research: a comparison of commonly used methods to determine mixed-handedness and ambidexterity

“…However, clinical laterality research is facing a major methodological issue: a strong variability in the definition and classification of mixed-handedness. More precisely, currently, there are no clear criteria for how mixed-handedness is defined and there are several different laterality index based cut-offs used in the literature such as -40 to + 40 (Arning et al, 2015;Mundorf et al, 2023), -50 to + 50 (Orlando et al, 2023), -60 to + 60 (Thomas et al, 2023;Veale, 2014), -70 to + 70 (Deep-Soboslay et al, 2010), -80 to + 80 (Cheng et al, 2020;Christman et al, 2007) and -99 to + 99 (Cannon et al, 1995) hindering the comparison and reproducibility of results. Of note, the -80 to +80 cut-off suggested by Christman et al (2007) is based on a simple median split on absolute values of EHI scores.…”