1. Neurobiological Research in Prevention Science Lisa Gatzke-Kopp, Ph.D.

2. Theories of Aggression High emotionality, hostile attribution bias (Crozier et al., 2008) Punishment insensitivity, predominance of approach over inhibitory motivational drives (Hundt et al., 2008) Poor inhibitory control (MacDonald, 2008)

3. Motivation Cognition Attention Incorporate feedback Reactivity to reward cues Shifting set Integration of multiple streams of information Working memory Inhibitory control Reactivity to novelty/ uncertainty Temperament Executive Function

4. Motivation Cognition Attention Incorporate feedback withdrawal Shifting set Integration of multiple streams of information Working memory Inhibitory control approach BEHAVIOR One Equation, Two Unknowns

5. Implications for Prevention Empirically supported programs exist ◦ Improvements exist on average- with many individuals failing to show improvement  Do individuals within a single target group have different needs? ◦ Effects are often difficult to maintain over developmental time  Can we determine the effectiveness of intervention change without delay?

6. Sample Children screened in fall of kindergarten ◦ Doesn’t seem to feel guilty, mean to others, gets in fights, temper tantrums, physically attacks others, destroys property, doesn’t get along with others, breaks rules, harms others, disobedient or defiant High AggressiveLow Aggressive Sample Size234133 Sex69% male62% male Aggression33.6910.76

7. PATHs to Success Intervention trial in Harrisburg School District FallSpringFallSpringFallSpringFallSpring 20072008200920102011 C1 K Pretest C2 K Pretest 1 st Post Test Intervention 1 st Post Test 2 nd Follow up 2 nd Follow Up Control Intervention Control

8. Violence Cognitive Control ParentPeerSchool Individual Vulnerability Behavioral Outcome Contextual Risk Affect/ Regulation Intervention Model Home Visiting PATHS Friendship Group

9. Neurobiological assessments Electrodermal activity ◦ Sensitivity to punishment ◦ Intensity of arousal Respiratory Sinus arrythmia ◦ Capacity for physiological control ◦ Appropriate arousal for task engagement Cardiac Pre-ejection period ◦ Responsivity to reward EEG ◦ alpha asymmetry  Predisposition in motivational direction ERP ◦ P300– conscious or “effortful” attention ◦ N2– inhibitory control ◦ ERN– self monitoring of performance

10. Assessing physiology…

11. Tasks Inhibitory Control- emotive context ◦ Neural inhibition, effect of emotional context on cognitive control, reactivity to reward and punishment cues Passive emotion induction ◦ Emotional reactivity to emotional context, differentiation between emotions, ability to recover from emotion induction

12. Preliminary findings-- baseline Teacher ratings ◦ For boys- high baseline skin conductance predicts poorer teacher relationships ◦ For girls– low baseline skin conductance predicts poorer teacher relationships  Within girls, those with higher SCR baseline have lower aggression scores

13. Preliminary findings--baseline Relational aggression ◦ For boys, high baseline SC predicts higher RA scores  Same finding for social competence generally ◦ For girls, low baseline SC predicts lower RA scores

14. Preliminary findings– reaction to frustration For girls- ◦ increased skin conductance during frustration is predictive of higher relational aggression For boys- ◦ RSA suppression during frustration is predictive of higher relational aggression ◦ Greater N2 (inhibitory control) during frustration is strongly associated with better prosocial behavior and fewer internalizing symptoms

15. Preliminary findings– reactivity to emotion induction For girls ◦ Greater RSA change during fear and anger is associated with a more positive relationship with teacher, less relational aggression ◦ Higher HR during films associated with more internalizing symptoms For boys ◦ RSA suppression during happy clip predictive of less relational aggression better teacher relationship ◦ RSA during anger clip associated with higher prosocial behavior and less aggression

16. Acknowledgements Collaborators ◦ Mark Greenberg, Ph.D. ◦ Karen Bierman, Ph.D. ◦ Sidney Segalowitz, Ph.D. ◦ Robert Nix, Ph.D. Post Docs ◦ Michelle Jetha, Ph.D. ◦ Heather Wadlinger, Ph.D Graduate Students ◦ Christine Fortunato ◦ Joseph Beeney ◦ David DuPuis ◦ Cindy Wilner Child Brain Development Lab Research Assistants Rachel Kane Shannon O’Neil Rachael Bellan Maria Chavara Lauren Fraser Kelly Guttman Theresa McKim Diana Nora Kaitlin Tobash Alison Spiro Brendan Peck Jennifer Valdivia Liza Oakes Funded by: The Pennsylvania Department of Health