Model-based network discovery of developmental and performance-related differences during risky decision-making

ABSTRACT Theories of adolescent neurodevelopment have largely focused on group‐level descriptions of neural changes that help explain increases in risk behavior that are stereotypical of the teen years. However, because these models are concerned with describing the “average” individual, they can fail to account for important individual or within‐group variability. New methodological developments now offer the possibility of accounting for both group trends and individual differences within the same modeling framework. Here we apply GIMME, a model‐based approach which uses both group and individual‐level information to construct functional connectivity maps, to investigate risky behavior and neural changes across development. Adolescents (N=30, Mage=13.22), young adults (N=23, Mage=19.19), and adults (N=31, Mage=43.93) completed a risky decision‐making task during an fMRI scan, and functional networks were constructed for each individual. We took two subgrouping approaches: 1) a confirmatory approach where we searched for functional connections that distinguished between our a priori age categories, and 2) an exploratory approach where we allowed an unsupervised algorithm to sort individuals freely. Contrary to expectations, we show that age is not the most influence contributing to network configurations. The implications for developmental theories and methodologies are discussed. HIGHLIGHTSGIMME estimates “representative” graphs for pre‐defined and data‐driven subgroups.Behavior, not age, is associated with greater variability in network connectivity.Highlight importance of within‐age variation when examining developmental effects.

[1]  B. Casey Beyond simple models of self-control to circuit-based accounts of adolescent behavior. , 2015, Annual review of psychology.

[2]  T. Hare,et al.  The Adolescent Brain , 2008, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Mert R. Sabuncu,et al.  The influence of head motion on intrinsic functional connectivity MRI , 2012, NeuroImage.

[4]  Wei Zhu,et al.  Unified structural equation modeling approach for the analysis of multisubject, multivariate functional MRI data , 2007, Human brain mapping.

[5]  Nicholas B. Allen,et al.  Arrested development? Reconsidering dual-systems models of brain function in adolescence and disorders , 2012, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[6]  M. Banich,et al.  Age differences in sensation seeking and impulsivity as indexed by behavior and self-report: evidence for a dual systems model. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[7]  P. Molenaar A Manifesto on Psychology as Idiographic Science: Bringing the Person Back Into Scientific Psychology, This Time Forever , 2004 .

[8]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Organizing Heterogeneous Samples Using Community Detection of GIMME-Derived Resting State Functional Networks , 2014, PloS one.

[9]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  A Monte Carlo Evaluation of Weighted Community Detection Algorithms , 2016, Front. Neuroinform..

[10]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Unsupervised Classification During Time-Series Model Building , 2017, Multivariate behavioral research.

[11]  S. Blakemore,et al.  Studying individual differences in human adolescent brain development , 2018, Nature Neuroscience.

[12]  M. Thase,et al.  Data-Driven Subgroups in Depression Derived from Directed Functional Connectivity Paths at Rest , 2017, Neuropsychopharmacology.

[13]  Laura Kann,et al.  Youth risk behavior surveillance--United States, 2013. , 2014, MMWR supplements.

[14]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Adaptive Adolescent Flexibility: Neurodevelopment of Decision-making and Learning in a Risky Context , 2017, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[15]  Adriana Galván,et al.  Meaningful Family Relationships: Neurocognitive Buffers of Adolescent Risk Taking , 2013, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[16]  Timothy J. Pleskac,et al.  Modeling behavior in a clinically diagnostic sequential risk-taking task. , 2005, Psychological review.

[17]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  The quality of adolescents' peer relationships modulates neural sensitivity to risk taking. , 2015, Social cognitive and affective neuroscience.

[18]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Automated Selection of Robust Individual-Level Structural Equation Models for Time Series Data , 2017 .

[19]  Sandra Jazbec,et al.  Amygdala and nucleus accumbens in responses to receipt and omission of gains in adults and adolescents , 2005, NeuroImage.

[20]  Daniel S. Margulies,et al.  NeuroVault.org: a web-based repository for collecting and sharing unthresholded statistical maps of the human brain , 2014, bioRxiv.

[21]  M. Chun,et al.  Functional connectome fingerprinting: Identifying individuals based on patterns of brain connectivity , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[22]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Extended unified SEM approach for modeling event-related fMRI data , 2011, NeuroImage.

[23]  L. Steinberg,et al.  Peers increase adolescent risk taking by enhancing activity in the brain's reward circuitry. , 2011, Developmental science.

[24]  Eveline A. Crone,et al.  A cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis of reward-related brain activation: Effects of age, pubertal stage, and reward sensitivity , 2014, Brain and Cognition.

[25]  K. R. Ridderinkhof,et al.  Neurocognitive mechanisms of cognitive control: The role of prefrontal cortex in action selection, response inhibition, performance monitoring, and reward-based learning , 2004, Brain and Cognition.

[26]  M. Chun,et al.  Functional connectome fingerprinting: Identifying individuals based on patterns of brain connectivity , 2015, Nature Neuroscience.

[27]  Stephen M. Smith,et al.  The future of FMRI connectivity , 2012, NeuroImage.

[28]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Longitudinal Changes in Prefrontal Cortex Activation Underlie Declines in Adolescent Risk Taking , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[29]  Paul J. Laurienti,et al.  An automated method for neuroanatomic and cytoarchitectonic atlas-based interrogation of fMRI data sets , 2003, NeuroImage.

[30]  Eliza Congdon,et al.  Decreasing Ventromedial Prefrontal Cortex Activity During Sequential Risk-Taking: An fMRI Investigation of the Balloon Analog Risk Task , 2012, Frontiers in Neuroscience.

[31]  Melanie R. Silverman,et al.  When Is an Adolescent an Adult? Assessing Cognitive Control in Emotional and Nonemotional Contexts , 2016, Psychological science.

[32]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience Dopaminergic Reward Sensitivity Can Promote Adolescent Health: a New Perspective on the Mechanism of Ventral Striatum Activation , 2022 .

[33]  Daniel J. Bauer,et al.  The disaggregation of within-person and between-person effects in longitudinal models of change. , 2011, Annual review of psychology.

[34]  Evan M. Gordon,et al.  Functional System and Areal Organization of a Highly Sampled Individual Human Brain , 2015, Neuron.

[35]  Eveline A. Crone,et al.  Individual differences in risk-taking tendencies modulate the neural processing of risky and ambiguous decision-making in adolescence , 2018, NeuroImage.

[36]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Methodological considerations for developmental longitudinal fMRI research , 2018, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[37]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Automatic search for fMRI connectivity mapping: An alternative to Granger causality testing using formal equivalences among SEM path modeling, VAR, and unified SEM , 2010, NeuroImage.

[38]  James M. Bjork,et al.  Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience Who Are Those " Risk-taking Adolescents " ? Individual Differences in Developmental Neuroimaging Research , 2022 .

[39]  G. Glover,et al.  Biological Substrates of Emotional Reactivity and Regulation in Adolescence During an Emotional Go-Nogo Task , 2008, Biological Psychiatry.

[40]  Terry L Jernigan,et al.  The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. , 2018, Journal of research on adolescence : the official journal of the Society for Research on Adolescence.

[41]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  Large-scale automated synthesis of human functional neuroimaging data , 2011, Nature Methods.

[42]  A. V. van Duijvenvoorde,et al.  Longitudinal Changes in Adolescent Risk-Taking: A Comprehensive Study of Neural Responses to Rewards, Pubertal Development, and Risk-Taking Behavior , 2015, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  Günce Keziban Orman,et al.  A Comparison of Community Detection Algorithms on Artificial Networks , 2009, Discovery Science.

[44]  Russell A. Poldrack,et al.  Six problems for causal inference from fMRI , 2010, NeuroImage.

[45]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Not just social sensitivity: Adolescent neural suppression of social feedback during risk taking , 2018, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[46]  Laurence Steinberg,et al.  Connecting brain responsivity and real-world risk taking: Strengths and limitations of current methodological approaches , 2017, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[47]  Gregory L. Stuart,et al.  Evaluation of a behavioral measure of risk taking: the Balloon Analogue Risk Task (BART). , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[48]  J. Dreher,et al.  Processing of primary and secondary rewards: A quantitative meta-analysis and review of human functional neuroimaging studies , 2013, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[49]  Abraham Z. Snyder,et al.  Spurious but systematic correlations in functional connectivity MRI networks arise from subject motion , 2012, NeuroImage.

[50]  Kathleen M. Gates,et al.  Group search algorithm recovers effective connectivity maps for individuals in homogeneous and heterogeneous samples , 2012, NeuroImage.

[51]  Christos Davatzikos,et al.  Benchmarking of participant-level confound regression strategies for the control of motion artifact in studies of functional connectivity , 2017, NeuroImage.

[52]  Eva H. Telzer,et al.  Failure to retreat: Blunted sensitivity to negative feedback supports risky behavior in adolescents , 2017, NeuroImage.

[53]  Matthieu Latapy,et al.  Computing Communities in Large Networks Using Random Walks , 2004, J. Graph Algorithms Appl..

[54]  K. Dodge,et al.  Age Patterns in Risk Taking Across the World , 2018, Journal of youth and adolescence.

[55]  Ashley R. Smith,et al.  The dual systems model: Review, reappraisal, and reaffirmation , 2015, Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience.

[56]  Todd A. Hare,et al.  Frontostriatal Maturation Predicts Cognitive Control Failure to Appetitive Cues in Adolescents , 2011, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[57]  E. Crone,et al.  Understanding adolescence as a period of social–affective engagement and goal flexibility , 2012, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

[58]  Arthur W. Toga,et al.  Automatic independent component labeling for artifact removal in fMRI , 2008, NeuroImage.

[59]  E. Crone,et al.  Increased striatal activity in adolescence benefits learning , 2017, Nature Communications.