Transcript No Slide Title

Spontaneous and instructed regulation of negative emotion
Brent L. Hughes, Tor D. Wager, Matthew L. Davidson, and Kevin N. Ochsner
324 Schermerhorn Hall
Department of Psychology
1190 Amsterdam Ave.
New York, NY 10027
Department of Psychology, Columbia University
Columbia Psychology SCAN Unit
http://www.scan.psych.columbia.edu/
Download this poster: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/psychology/tor/
RESULTS: fMRI ACTIVITY
Regions Involved in Spontaneous
Regulation
•
Recent imaging research has identified regions of PFC important for the
goal-directed, deliberate, voluntary reappraisal of aversive stimuli (Beauregard
et al., 2001; Ochsner et al., 2002; Phan et al., 2004; Urry et al., 2006)
• Behavioral research (Erber, 1996) suggests that individuals also
spontaneously regulate their emotion when faced with aversive situations, even
when not explicitly directed to do so, but there are no brain-based studies of this.
QUESTION
• In this study, we sought to identify common and distinct regions
involved in the spontaneous and instructed regulation of emotion
VMPFC
Hippocampus
6
Look Neg < Look Neu BOLD
BACKGROUND
• The capacity to adaptively regulate emotion is essential for both mental and
physical health
3
2
1
0
-1
1.5
2
2.5
RESULTS: REPORTED AFFECT
Regions Involved in Instructed Regulation
r = 0.36
0
IFG
Figure 6. Ratings of negative affect showed that reappraisal
decreased negative affect reported in response to photos.
-5
3
0
0.5
1
1.5
Anticipation and Stimulus Trial
8 sec
+
4 – 7 sec
+
2.1 sec
How
negative
do you
feel?
2
SUMMARY and CONCLUSIONS
Drop in Negative Affect
Drop in Negative Affect
(Neutral - Negative Affect Report)
(Negative - Reapp Affect Report)
1
2
1
• The Look Neg > Look Neutral comparison showed increases in frontal,
parietal, and insular cortices, amygdala, nucleus accumbens (NACC),
Post. Insula and brainstem, and decreases in ventromedial frontal cortex, superior
temporal cortices, and mid-cingulate.
Rostral
PFC
2
Figure 4. Reapp Neg > Look Neg
Intersection with Covariate (activation at
p < .05 FDR corrected (p < .004), AND
correlated with reduced affect p < 0.05)
Figure 3. Look Neg >Look Neutral
Intersection with Covariate (activation at
p < .05 FDR corrected (p < .004), AND
correlated with reduced affect p < 0.05)
Activation and positive correlation
Activation and positive correlation
Deactivation and negative correlation
Deactivation and negative correlation
Activation and negative correlation
Deactivation and positive correlation
Activation and negative correlation
Deactivation and positive correlation
Positive = positive correlation with reductions in affect
Positive = positive correlation with reductions in affect
TRIAL STRUCTURE
4 sec
4
Cerebellum
PARTICIPANTS
• n = 36 participants, mean age = 22 years
SCAN & ANALYSIS PARAMETERS
• EPI BOLD imaging on 1.5T GE (TR = 2 s, 31 slices 3.5 x 3.5 x 4.5 mm
Ant Insula
voxels).
Sup temporal
• Pre-processing and 1st level analysis with SPM2
• 2nd-level analysis using robust regression to down-weight outliers Thalamus
(Wager et al., 2005)
STIMULI
DMPFC
• Negative and neutral IAPS images
TRIAL TYPES
R DLPFC
• Reappraise Negative Images = Instructed regulation
SMA
• Look at Negative Images = Spontaneous responses, which could
include regulation of emotion
• Look at Neutral Images = Spontaneous responses to neutral events
2 sec
r = 0.44
1
Midbrain
METHODS
5
5
Reapp Neg > Look Neg BOLD
INTRODUCTION
4 – 7 sec
+
Common Regions for Spontaneous and Instructed Regulation
Figure 1
ANALYSIS PATHWAY
Step 2 Used whole brain regression analyses with self-reported affect
as a covariate to identify regions:
1. Whose activation predicts drops in negative affect when Looking at
Negative Images
2. Whose activation predicts drops in negative affect during Reappraisal
Step 3 Identified intersection of Steps 1 and 2 (activated AND correlated).
Step 4 Identified regions involved in both spontaneous and instructed
regulation (P < .1 FDR activation and p < .05 correlation in 1 AND 2)
Temporal/
Occipital Cortex
R IFG
DMPFC
Activation correlated positively with
reductions in negative affect
Intersection
Figure 5
Step 1: Reappraisal > Look Neg
Step 2: Reappraisal > Look Neg Cov
Figure 5. Intersection of Figure 3 and Figure 4
(p < .1 FDR activation and p < .05 correlation)
Step 4
Intersection
Figure 3
Intersection
Figure 4
Figure 2
r = 0.44
2
1
0
-1
1
(see Nichols et al., 2005 for details on conjunction analysis methods.)
Step 3
3
Reapp Neg > Look Neg BOLD
Look Neg < Look Neu BOLD
Cerebellum
Step 2: Look Neg > Look Neutral Cov
R DLPFC
• To further constrain this hypothesis, we compared Look Neg activity
with activity elicited by the voluntary reappraisal of negative
affect. Compared with viewing negative images, reappraising them
(Reapp Neg > Look Neg) further increased activity in a number of similar
sites, including lateral and medial frontal cortices, ventral striatum, and
thalamus. Decreases were found in amygdala, parahippocampal cortex,
and STS. Frontal activity was most strongly correlated with changes in
affect reports.
• DMPFC and right IFG showed activations and correlations with
reduced affect reports in both free-viewing and instructed conditions.
These regions are candidate regions for voluntary context-based control
of appraisal.
REFERENCES
Step 1 Used contrasts to identify regions (P < .05 FDR) involved in:
1. Spontaneous responses to images (Look Neg > Look Neu)
2. Instructed reappraisal (Reapp Neg > Look Neg)
Step 1: Look Neg > Look Neutral
DMPFC
• Conjunction analyses revealed regions whose activity correlated with
reduced affect, including the anterior insula/opercular junction,
hippocampus,
midbrain,
Right
IFG,
DMPFC,
dACC,
and
cerebellum. These regions may play roles in the appraisal process and/or
internally guided interpretations of aversive pictures. Decreases in
VMPFC and superior temporal cortex may relate to differences in the selfrelevance of pictures, cognitive activity, or affective experience.
1.5
2
2.5
3
2
r = 0.39
1
0
-1
-2
-3
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Drop in Negative Affect
Drop in Negative Affect
(Neutral - Negative Affect Report)
(Negative - Reapp Affect Report)
Beauregard, M, Levesque, J, Bourgouin, P. (2001). Neural Correlates of
Conscious Self-Regulation of Emotion. Journal of Neuroscience,
21: RC165: 1-6.
Erber, R. (1996). The self-regulation of moods. In L. L. Martin & A.Tesser
(Eds.), Striving and feeling: Interactions among goals, affect,and selfregulation (pp. 251-275).
Harenski, CL, & Hamann, S. (2006). Neural correlates of regulating negative
emotions related to moral violations. NeuroImage, 30 (1), 313-324.
Nichols, T., Brett, M., Andersson, J., Wager, T., & Poline, J. B. (2005). Valid conjunction
inference with the minimum statistic. Neuroimage, 25(3), 653-660.
Ochsner, K. N., Bunge, S. A., Gross, J. J., & Gabrieli, J. D. E. (2002). Rethinking feelings: An
fMRI study of the cognitive regulation of emotion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,
14:8.
Phan, K. L., Fitzgerald, D. A., Nathan, P. J., Moore, G. J., Uhde, T. W.,&
Tancer, M. E. (2005). Neural substrates for voluntary suppression
of negative affect: A functional magnetic resonance imaging study.
Biol Psychiatry, 57(3), 210-219.
Urry, H. L., van Reekum, C. M., Johnstone, T., Kalin, N. H., Thurow, M.E.,
Schaefer, H. S., et al. (2006). Amygdala and ventromedial prefrontal
cortex are inversely coupled during regulation of negative affect and
predict the diurnal pattern of cortisol secretion among older adults.
JNeurosci, 26(16), 4415-4425.
Wager, T. D., Keller, M. C., Lacey, S. C., & Jonides, J. (2005). Increased sensitivity in
neuroimaging analyses using robust regression. NeuroImage, 26(1), 99-113.
Wager, T. D., Phan, K. L., Liberzon, I., & Taylor, S. F. (2003). Valence, gender, and
lateralization of functional brain anatomy in emotion: A meta-analysis of findings from
neuroimaging. Neuroimage, 19, 513-531.