Cognitive modes involved in emotion regulation identified using Constrained Principal Component Analysis for fMRI (fMRI-CPCA)

Le résumé fourni par la source

Abstract Meta-analyses of functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) studies have identified networks of widely distributed brain regions supporting emotion regulation. These overlap with attentional or cognitive control brain networks. The literature is short on data speaking to specific neurocognitive functions of these broad brain networks in reappraisal - a key emotion regulatory strategy involving the reframing of an event according to a goal to increase or decrease experienced emotion. We address this gap by examining both the spatial configuration and temporal profile of event-related blood oxygenation level dependent (BOLD) responses during a task requiring reappraisal. We analysed fMRI datasets obtained from 84 participants (51% female) who were instructed to increase or decrease their emotional response to unpleasant images. We extracted spatial maps and their estimated temporal event-related BOLD signal changes of four components with the highest loadings. Neurocognitive functions were derived by mapping each component onto templates of previously identified task-based cognitive modes. This analysis yielded four cognitive modes: 1) “multiple demand” 2) “response”, 3) “re-evaluation”, and 4) “default mode". The temporal profiles showed particularly prominent patterns for the increase and decrease conditions in “multiple demand” (mode 1) and “re-evaluation” (mode 3) respectively. These findings highlight a central role for specific neurocognitive processes linked to attentional control (“multiple demand”) and switching (“re-evaluation”), as part of the broad brain networks supporting reappraisal. Moreover, the level of neural engagement of these cognitive modes varies depending on the regulatory goal. These findings provide tangible targets for neurocognitive interventions such as neurostimulation when emotion regulation is compromised.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.