Prospective longitudinal associations between harsh parenting and corticolimbic function during adolescence

Abstract

Childhood adversity is thought to undermine youth socioemotional development via altered neural function within regions that support emotion processing. These effects are hypothesized to be developmentally specific, with adversity in early childhood sculpting subcortical structures (e.g., amygdala) and adversity during adolescence impacting later-developing structures (e.g., prefrontal cortex; PFC). However, little work has tested these theories directly in humans. Using prospectively collected longitudinal data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS) (N = 4,144) and neuroimaging data from a subsample of families recruited in adolescence (N = 162), the current study investigated the trajectory of harsh parenting across childhood (i.e., ages 3 to 9) and how initial levels versus changes in harsh parenting across childhood were associated with corticolimbic activation and connectivity during socioemotional processing. Harsh parenting in early childhood (indexed by the intercept term from a linear growth curve model) was associated with less amygdala, but not PFC, reactivity to angry facial expressions. In contrast, change in harsh parenting across childhood (indexed by the slope term) was associated with less PFC, but not amygdala, activation to angry faces. Increases in, but not initial levels of, harsh parenting were also associated with stronger positive amygdala–PFC connectivity during angry face processing.

An ecological approach to understanding the developing brain: Examples linking poverty, parenting, neighborhoods, and the brain.

“…This study fits with an array of recent studies linking dimensions of parenting to the structure and function of the amygdala and broader cortiolimbic system (e.g., Farber et al, 2019; Kopala-Sibley et al, 2020; Whittle et al, 2016), as well as animal models linking adversity to disrupted maternal behavior, which in turn affects offspring brain development (Baram et al, 2012). Additionally, we have since found similar associations between parenting in early childhood and later amygdala reactivity to angry faces (Gard et al, in press) in a subsample of boys and girls from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (FFCWS; Reichman, Teitler, Garfinkel, & McLanahan, 2001), a representative sample of families living in urban environments with substantial enrichment for families living in poverty. Thus, mounting evidence from our lab and others suggests that parenting is an important predictor of corticolimbic functioning longitudinally, particularly within families living in poverty.…”

Deadly Gun Violence, Neighborhood Collective Efficacy, and Adolescent Neurobehavioral Outcomes

“…Covariates were similarly entered in a stepwise manner (SI methods). The PFC mask was defined by Brodmann's areas 9, 10, 11, 47, 24, 32, and 25, consistent with previous studies in this sample (16,48). Only ipsilateral connections between the amygdala and PFC were examined (49).…”

Testing a Developmental Model of Positive Parenting, Amygdala–Subgenual Anterior Cingulate Cortex Connectivity, and Depressive Symptoms in Adolescents Before and During the COVID-19 Pandemic

“…It is also possible that other neural connections act as a more robust link between parenting and the development of increased versus decreased risk for experiencing depressive symptoms during the pandemic. For example, aversive parenting has been associated with positive connectivity between the amygdala and medial prefrontal cortex during socioemotional processing in adolescents ( 56 ), a pattern that has been linked to internalizing symptoms ( 57 , 58 ). It is also noteworthy that in a model controlling for pubertal status, the concurrent association between BLA–sgACC connectivity and pre-pandemic symptoms was reduced to a trend after FDR adjustment; furthermore, in our primary model, the prospective association between BLA–sgACC connectivity and depressive symptoms during the pandemic was reduced to a trend after FDR adjustment.…”