Neurophysiological evidence of an association between cognitive control and defensive reactivity processes in young children

Abstract

Interactions between cognitive control and affective processes, such as defensive reactivity, are intimately involved in healthy and unhealthy human development. However, cognitive control and defensive reactivity processes are often studied in isolation and rarely examined in early childhood. To address these gaps, we examined the relationships between multiple neurophysiological measures of cognitive control and defensive reactivity in young children. Specifically, we assessed two event-related potentials thought to index cognitive control processes – the error-related negativity (ERN) and error positivity (Pe) – measured across two tasks, and two markers of defensive reactivity processes – startle reflex and resting parietal asymmetry – in a sample of 3- to 7-year old children. Results revealed that measures of cognitive control and defensive reactivity were related such that evidence of poor cognitive control (smaller ERN) was associated with high defensive reactivity (larger startle and greater right relative to left parietal activity). The strength of associations between the ERN and measures of defensive reactivity did not vary by age, providing evidence that poor cognitive control relates to greater defensive reactivity across early childhood years.

Associations between Disorder-Specific Symptoms of Anxiety and Error-Monitoring Brain Activity in Young Children

“…Similarly, Torpey et al (2013) found that a smaller ERN characterized 6-year-olds who displayed fearful behaviors. Consistent with these results, we recently reported an association between a smaller ERN and higher defensive reactivity, as indexed by a larger startle magnitude to aversive stimuli, in a sample of 3–7 year olds (Lo et al 2015). Nonetheless, the evidence in young children remains limited because there are no investigations examining the relationship between the ERN and concurrent diagnostically-defined symptoms of anxiety disorders using a parent-reported measure that captures the full spectrum of severity across multiple dimensions of anxiety.…”

“…Research in healthy adults suggests that a larger ERN is related to better behavioral performance, namely higher accuracy and fewer errors (Gehring et al 1993; Maier et al 2011), supporting theories that propose the ERN serves critical cognitive control functions involved in adaptive behavioral adjustments and error correction (Botvinick and Cohen 2014). Of the few studies in children that have provided data on the association between the ERN and performance, results confirm that a larger ERN is associated with higher accuracy and fewer errors (e.g., Grammer et al 2014; Lo et al 2015). …”

“…Results suggest that similar to adults, older children with OCD symptoms exhibit a larger ERN compared to healthy controls (Carrasco et al 2013). Other investigations in children have suggested that a larger ERN is associated with higher levels of anxiety in children 8 years or older (Ladouceur et al 2006; Meyer et al 2012), but that the relationship is opposite in younger children (Lo et al 2015; Torpey et al 2013). …”

“…Given that there is no research on the association between diagnostically-defined symptoms of different anxiety disorders and the ERN in this age range, we took an exploratory approach as to which anxiety type would show the largest association with ERN. Regardless, given previous work in this age group (Lo et al 2015; Meyer et al 2012; Torpey et al 2013), we expected higher levels of anxiety to be related to a smaller ERN. Moreover, we predicted that anxiety would moderate the relationship between the ERN and number of errors such that children with higher levels of anxiety would demonstrate no relationship between the ERN and number of errors, indicative of ineffective functioning.…”

“…Based on visual inspection of the grand average ERNs and previous ERN studies in young samples (e.g., Grammer et al 2014; Lo et al 2015), the ERN and its correct-response negativity (CRN) counterpart were quantified as the average amplitude in the 0–100 ms post-response time window relative to a − 200 to 0 ms pre-response baseline. The average amplitude in the 0–100 ms post-response time window were quantified across following five midline electrode sites: Fz (frontal), FCz (fronto-central), Cz (central), CPz (central-parietal), and Pz (parietal).…”