The personality dispositions and resting-state neural correlates associated with aggressive children

Abstract

Despite aggression being detrimental to children’s physical health, mental health, and social development, the dispositional and neurological antecedents of aggression in the child are poorly understood. Here we examined the relationship between trait aggression as measured by Buss and Warren’s Aggression Questionnaire and personality traits measured with Big Five Questionnaire-Children in 77 primary-school children, and recorded resting-state brain activity (fractional amplitude of low-frequency fluctuations, fALFF) and functional connectivity (rsFC) using functional magnetic resonance imaging. The present results showed that trait aggression was negatively correlated with agreeableness and positively correlated with neuroticism. The brain analyses showed that children with a higher propensity for aggression had a lower fALFF mainly in the left superior temporal gyrus, right parahippocampal gyrus, and left supramarginal gyrus. Physical and total aggression were negatively associated with rsFC between the right parahippocampal gyrus and the right putamen. Further analysis revealed that this rsFC could moderate the influence of neuroticism on total aggression. Moreover, the results suggest the presence of a sex difference in the neurodevelopmental mechanisms underlying aggression in middle childhood. Overall, our findings indicate that aggressive children have lower agreeableness and higher neuroticism, and the underlying neural systems are mainly implicated in social judgment and empathy.

Sex vs Gender: A Biological Location for Gender, not Sex.

“…Children with early-onset conduct disorder show severe levels of aggression (von Polier et al, 2020). Decreased functional activity in the putamen was significantly associated with physical aggression in a study of 9 -12 year-olds (Li et al, 2020).…”

“…The putamen lies in the subcortical region as a part of the basal ganglia (Ghandili & Munakomi, 2020). It plays a role in facilitating movement by history-based motivation to act for reward (Muranishi et al, 2011;Mink, 1996), moderation of physical aggression (Kolla et al, 2021;Li et al, 2020). Putamen size decreases in both sexes during puberty and more markedly in males (Goddings et al, 2014).…”

“…Direct aggression encompasses direct verbal or physical confrontation, whereas indirect aggression uses social means such as gossip, character attacks, rumormongering, rejection or exclusion, and manipulation of peer relationships (Card, Stucky, Sawalani, & Little, 2008). In childhood, boys lean toward physical aggression while girls lean toward social aggression (Li et al, 2020;Ligthart, Bartels, Hoekstra, Hudziak, & Boomsma, 2005).…”

Goal setting and attaining: Neural correlates of positive coping style and hope

“…Additionally, pathway thinking is negatively correlated to ALFF in left FPC (r = −.17, p < .001), right mOFC (r = −.16, p < .001), right parahippocampal (r = −.16, p < .001), right fusiform (r = −.17, p < .001), and left inferior temporal gyrus (r = −.16, p <.001), and this finding partly supports the aforementioned findings. Additionally, to assess the reliability of the association between neural correlates and trait hope, we examined the association between trait hope and fALFF, the other important indicator of RS-fMRI (Li et al, 2020;Wang et al, 2017Wang et al, , 2018. After controlling for gender, age, and FD, we found that trait hope had negative associations with the fALFF (e.g., m/zfALFF) in the left FPC (r = −.19, p < .001); pathway was positively linked to the superior temporal gyrus (STG; r = .18, p <.001) and secondary somatosensory cortex (SII; r = .17, p < .001).…”

21st Century Neo-androgyny: What is androgyny anymore and why we should still care.

“…Considering nurture and social experience may influence the average degree of any innately focused difference (Sisk, 2016), it means even innate dimorphic traits may be quantitively flexible to at least some degree but less so qualitatively. For example, male aggression is more direct or physical, while female aggression is more indirect or social (Li et al, 2020;Ligthart et al, 2005).…”