MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

The neurobiology of wellness: 1H-MRS correlates of agency, flexibility and neuroaffective reserves in healthy young adults

2020· article· en· W3097538497 on OpenAlexaff
Tara L. White, Meghan A. Gonsalves, Ronald A. Cohen, Ashley D. Harris, Mollie A. Monnig, Edward G. Walsh, Adam Z Nitenson, Eric C. Porges, Damon G. Lamb, Adam J. Woods, Cara B. Borja

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuroImage · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies
Canadian institutionsAlberta Children's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institute on Drug AbuseU.S. Department of Veterans AffairsCenter for Clinical and Translational ResearchNational Science FoundationNational Institutes of HealthNational Institute on AgingNational Institute on Alcohol Abuse and AlcoholismBrown University
KeywordsPsychologyAggressionDevelopmental psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (1H-MRS) is a noninvasive imaging technique that measures the concentration of metabolites in defined areas of the human brain in vivo. The underlying structure of natural metabolism-emotion relationships is unknown. Further, there is a wide range of between-person differences in metabolite concentration in healthy individuals, but the significance of this variation for understanding emotion in healthy humans is unclear. Here we investigated the relationship of two emotional constructs, agency and flexibility, with the metabolites glutamate and glutamine (Glx), N-acetylaspartate (tNAA), choline (Cho), creatine (tCr), and myo-inositol (Ins) in the right dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC) in medically and psychiatrically healthy volunteers (N = 20, 9 female; mean age = 22.8 years, SD = 3.40). The dACC was selected because this region is an integrative hub involved in multiple brain networks of emotion, cognition and behavior. Emotional traits were assessed using the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire Brief Form (MPQ-BF), an empirically derived self-report instrument with an orthogonal factor structure. Phenotypes evaluated were positive and negative agency (MPQ-BF Social Potency, Aggression), emotional and behavioral flexibility (MPQ-BF Absorption, Control-reversed), and positive and negative affect (MPQ-BF Social Closeness; Stress Reaction, Alienation). The resting concentration of tNAA in the dACC was robustly positively correlated with Absorption (r = +0.56, unadjusted p = .005), moderately positively correlated with Social Potency (r = +0.42, unadjusted p = .03), and robustly negatively correlated with Aggression (r = -0.59, unadjusted p = .003). Absorption and Aggression accounted for substantial variance in tNAA (R2 = 0.31, 0.35; combined R2 = 0.50), and survived correction for multiple comparisons (Holm-Bonferroni adjusted p = .032, 0.021, respectively). dACC Glx and Cho had modest relationships with behavioral flexibility and social affiliation that did not survive this multiple correction, providing effect sizes for future work. Principal Component Analysis (PCA) revealed a three-factor orthogonal solution indicating specific relationships between: 1) Glx and behavioral engagement; 2) Cho and affiliative bonding; and 3) tNAA and a novel dimension that we term neuroaffective reserves. Our results inform the neurobiology of agency and flexibility and lay the groundwork for understanding mechanisms of natural emotion using 1H-MRS.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations22
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNeuroImage→Same topicFunctional Brain Connectivity Studies→French-language works237,207→