Brain Reactivity and Vulnerability to Social Feedback Following Acute Stress in Early Adolescence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Early adolescence is a time of high psychosocial stress exposure and high stress reactivity, associated with the development of mental disorders. Understanding how the brain reacts to acute and social stressors during this period might help us detect and protect those at risk. METHODS: We used functional magnetic resonance imaging to investigate acute social stress reactivity in non-clinical adolescents between ages 13 and 15 years (N = 61) with a range of depression scores (Beck Depression Inventory scores 0-32). Participants underwent a modified Montreal Imaging Stress Task (MIST) with psychosocial stress condition consisting of two parts: acute stress (challenging maths) followed by social feedback (positive or negative), separated by brief recovery periods. The test condition was compared to a non-stressful control. We examined brain responses to social feedback relative to the acute stressor and feedback valence. RESULTS: Psychosocial stress produced differential activation in the paracingulate gyrus, insula, and deactivation in the ventral striatum. Receiving social feedback, compared to acute stress, activated cortical midline regions such as the medial prefrontal cortex and posterior cingulate cortex. Positive feedback increased activity in frontal pole and middle frontal gyrus whereas negative feedback did not show any differential response in the whole group. However, participants with depressive symptoms reacted with higher activation in the posterior cingulate cortex to negative feedback. CONCLUSION: We show that social feedback after an acute stressor activates regions involved in self-referential processing, with positive feedback eliciting generally higher activation and negative feedback impacting only individuals with vulnerable mood traits during early adolescence.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".