Attachment security and striatal functional connectivity in typically developing children
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Attachment security is formed through interactions with a main caregiver during the first three years of life and reflects inter-individual differences in mental representations for the relationship. The striatum is known to be a key structure to initiate attachment behaviours and maintain attachment relationships as well as to modulate reward-related processing as part of the approach module in current neurobiological models of human attachment. Although findings have suggested critical roles of the striatum in inter-individual differences in attachment, most studies were based on a wide variety of tasks and very few have investigated these associations in intrinsic brain connectivity in typically developing children. In the present study, using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging, we examined the striatal functional connectivity according to children's attachment security in 68 nine-year-olds (Secure attachment = 39, Insecure attachment = 29, mean age/SD = 9.62/0.69). Children with secure attachment demonstrated increased functional connectivity in the tempro-limbic region, compared to children with insecure attachment. In addition, the child-reported attachment security scores were negatively associated with the caudate-prefrontal connectivity, but positively with the putamen-visual area connectivity. These data demonstrate that inter-individual differences in attachment can be captured in striatal functional connectivity organization in the typical brain.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".