Search

Exaggerated amygdala and reduced ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC) responsiveness during emotional processing have been reported in studies examining individual anxiety disorders. Studies are needed, however, which directly compare activation of amygdalo-cortical circuitry across multiple anxiety disorders within the same study. Here we compared cortico-limbic neurocircuitry across three different anxiety disorders using a well-validated emotional probe task.Sixty-five adult volunteers, including 22 healthy controls (HC) and participants meeting DSM-IV criteria for either posttraumatic stress disorder (14 PTSD), panic disorder (14 PD), or specific animal phobia (15 SP), underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) at 3 T while passively viewing backward-masked images of faces expressing fear, happy, and neutral emotions.A group comprising all three anxiety disorders showed greater activation within the left amygdala and reduced activation within the vmPFC compared to the HC group during the masked fear versus neutral condition. Pairwise group comparisons showed that amygdala activation only reached significance for the PTSD versus HCs, whereas decreased vmPFC was only evident for SP and PD groups versus the HC group. Furthermore, activation did not differ among the anxiety groups when contrasted directly with one another. A similar pattern was observed for masked happy versus neutral faces.Exclusive of specific diagnostic category, anxiety disorders were generally associated with increased activation of the amygdala and reduced activation within vmPFC. Categorical distinctions were generally weak or not observed and suggest that functional differences may reflect the magnitude of responses within a common neurocircuitry across disorders rather than activation of distinct systems.

IntroductionThe ability to perform optimally under pressure is critical across many occupations, including the military, first responders, and competitive sport. Despite recognition that such performance depends on a range of cognitive factors, how common these factors are across performance domains remains unclear. The current study sought to integrate existing knowledge in the performance field in the form of a transdisciplinary expert consensus on the cognitive mechanisms that underlie performance under pressure.MethodsInternational experts were recruited from four performance domains [(i) Defense; (ii) Competitive Sport; (iii) Civilian High-stakes; and (iv) Performance Neuroscience]. Experts rated constructs from the Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) framework (and several expert-suggested constructs) across successive rounds, until all constructs reached consensus for inclusion or were eliminated. Finally, included constructs were ranked for their relative importance.ResultsSixty-eight experts completed the first Delphi round, with 94% of experts retained by the end of the Delphi process. The following 10 constructs reached consensus across all four panels (in order of overall ranking): (1) Attention; (2) Cognitive Control—Performance Monitoring; (3) Arousal and Regulatory Systems—Arousal; (4) Cognitive Control—Goal Selection, Updating, Representation, and Maintenance; (5) Cognitive Control—Response Selection and Inhibition/Suppression; (6) Working memory—Flexible Updating; (7) Working memory—Active Maintenance; (8) Perception and Understanding of Self—Self-knowledge; (9) Working memory—Interference Control, and (10) Expert-suggested—Shifting.DiscussionOur results identify a set of transdisciplinary neuroscience-informed constructs, validated through expert consensus. This expert consensus is critical to standardizing cognitive assessment and informing mechanism-targeted interventions in the broader field of human performance optimization.