Maternal sensitivity, infant limbic structure volume and functional connectivity: a preliminary study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanisms underlying the profound parental effects on cognitive, emotional and social development in humans remain poorly understood. Studies with nonhuman models suggest variations in parental care affect the limbic system, influential to learning, autobiography and emotional regulation. In some research, nonoptimal care relates to decreases in neurogenesis, although other work suggests early-postnatal social adversity accelerates the maturation of limbic structures associated with emotional learning. We explored whether maternal sensitivity predicts human limbic system development and functional connectivity patterns in a small sample of human infants. When infants were 6 months of age, 20 mother-infant dyads attended a laboratory-based observational session and the infants underwent neuroimaging at the same age. After considering age at imaging, household income and postnatal maternal anxiety, regression analyses demonstrated significant indirect associations between maternal sensitivity and bilateral hippocampal volume at six months, with the majority of associations between sensitivity and the amygdala demonstrating similar indirect, but not significant results. Moreover, functional analyses revealed direct associations between maternal sensitivity and connectivity between the hippocampus and areas important for emotional regulation and socio-emotional functioning. Sensitivity additionally predicted indirect associations between limbic structures and regions related to autobiographical memory. Our volumetric results are consistent with research indicating accelerated limbic development in response to early social adversity, and in combination with our functional results, if replicated in a larger sample, may suggest that subtle, but important, variations in maternal care influence neuroanatomical trajectories important to future cognitive and emotional functioning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".