Biomarkers for Cognitive Control, Response Inhibition, Aggressivity, Impulsivity, and Violence.

Q3 Neuroscience Advances in neurobiology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1007/978-3-031-69491-2_24
Matthew J Hoptman, Ragy R Girgis, Daniel C Javitt
{"title":"Biomarkers for Cognitive Control, Response Inhibition, Aggressivity, Impulsivity, and Violence.","authors":"Matthew J Hoptman, Ragy R Girgis, Daniel C Javitt","doi":"10.1007/978-3-031-69491-2_24","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Deficits in cognitive control contribute to behavioral impairments across neuropsychiatric disorders. Cognitive control is captured as a construct in the Research Domain Construct (RDoC) matrix and incorporate subdomains of goal selection, response selection, and performance monitoring. Relevant tasks for these subdomains include the \"AX\" version of the continuous performance task (goal selection) and the Go/NoGo and Stop-Signal reaction time tasks (response selection). Underlying mechanisms for these domains have been investigated intensively using fMRI and event-related potential (ERP) approaches, which provide candidate biomarkers for translational research. In RDoC, impulsive behaviors are provisionally assigned to the cognitive control/response selection construct, but other factors may also contribute. Impulsivity has gained increased importance over recent years due to its link to aggression and suicidality, which is mediated especially through the constructs of urgency and frustrative nonreward. These constructs, in turn, may be captured through scales such as the Urgency, (Lack of) Premeditation, (Lack of) Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking (UPPS-P) impulsivity scale and the Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm (PSAP), respectively. At present, no validated biomarkers exist for either urgency or aggressivity. Potential directions for the development of predictive biomarkers for both targets are discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7360,"journal":{"name":"Advances in neurobiology","volume":"40 ","pages":"725-756"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in neurobiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-69491-2_24","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Neuroscience","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Deficits in cognitive control contribute to behavioral impairments across neuropsychiatric disorders. Cognitive control is captured as a construct in the Research Domain Construct (RDoC) matrix and incorporate subdomains of goal selection, response selection, and performance monitoring. Relevant tasks for these subdomains include the "AX" version of the continuous performance task (goal selection) and the Go/NoGo and Stop-Signal reaction time tasks (response selection). Underlying mechanisms for these domains have been investigated intensively using fMRI and event-related potential (ERP) approaches, which provide candidate biomarkers for translational research. In RDoC, impulsive behaviors are provisionally assigned to the cognitive control/response selection construct, but other factors may also contribute. Impulsivity has gained increased importance over recent years due to its link to aggression and suicidality, which is mediated especially through the constructs of urgency and frustrative nonreward. These constructs, in turn, may be captured through scales such as the Urgency, (Lack of) Premeditation, (Lack of) Perseverance, and Sensation Seeking (UPPS-P) impulsivity scale and the Point Subtraction Aggression Paradigm (PSAP), respectively. At present, no validated biomarkers exist for either urgency or aggressivity. Potential directions for the development of predictive biomarkers for both targets are discussed.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
认知控制、反应抑制、攻击性、冲动性和暴力的生物标志物。
认知控制能力的缺陷会导致神经精神疾病的行为障碍。认知控制是研究领域结构(RDoC)矩阵中的一个结构,包含目标选择、反应选择和表现监测等子领域。这些子域的相关任务包括 "AX "版持续表现任务(目标选择)和走/不走及停止-信号反应时间任务(反应选择)。这些领域的基本机制已利用 fMRI 和事件相关电位(ERP)方法进行了深入研究,为转化研究提供了候选生物标记。在 RDoC 中,冲动行为暂时归属于认知控制/反应选择结构,但其他因素也可能起作用。近年来,冲动性因其与攻击性和自杀性之间的联系而变得越来越重要,而攻击性和自杀性尤其是通过紧迫性和挫折性非奖励性结构介导的。而这些因素又可分别通过紧急、(缺乏)预谋、(缺乏)毅力和感觉寻求(UPPS-P)冲动量表和点减法攻击范式(PSAP)等量表来反映。目前,紧迫性和攻击性都没有有效的生物标志物。本文讨论了针对这两个目标开发预测性生物标志物的潜在方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Advances in neurobiology
Advances in neurobiology Neuroscience-Neurology
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Self-Similarity Logic May Shape the Organization of the Nervous System. Advances in Understanding Fractals in Affective and Anxiety Disorders. Analyzing Eye Paths Using Fractals. Box-Counting Fractal Analysis: A Primer for the Clinician. Clinical Sensitivity of Fractal Neurodynamics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1