Neural predictors of risky driving and susceptibility to peer influences in adole

描述(申请人提供)：车祸是青少年死亡的主要原因，也是造成青少年非致命性伤害的主要因素1，2。青少年司机在青少年乘客3-6在场的情况下，撞车风险特别高。同龄人的影响无处不在、影响巨大，在青春期尤其显著，并与危害健康的行为7有关，但其中涉及的变异性和机制尚未得到很好的理解。一个可能促进青春期危险行为的因素是，情感和认知控制系统8-10之间的大脑发育可能不平衡，这不仅导致整体上风险更高的选择，而且在有同龄人在场的冒险过程中，奖励活动增加，对社交拒绝12，13的敏感性增强。在这项研究中，我们旨在阐明以下神经认知预测因素：(1)危险的青少年驾驶；(2)在青少年驾驶的背景下对同伴影响的敏感性；以及(3)克服危险的同伴影响的能力。为了实现这些目标，我们建议将神经成像(FMRI)措施整合到一项目前得到资助的研究中，该研究在最先进的驾驶模拟器中实验性地操纵同龄人的影响。主要结果包括模拟器中的行为，这些行为与真实驾驶环境(超速、紧随距离、红绿灯违规)下的高伤亡率和致死率有关。我们假设：[(1a)在冒险任务14期间神经奖赏系统的活动增加，以及(1b)在反应抑制任务15期间认知控制系统的活动减少将预测模拟器中更倾向于危险驾驶行为；(2a)在风险任务14期间增加奖赏活动，以及(2b)在神经成像环境中排除16期间与痛苦相关的区域的神经活动增加将预测在驾驶模拟器中有同龄人在场的情况下对冒险的易感性增加；和(3)认知控制系统中神经活动的增加将预测在驾驶模拟器中对同伴影响的易感性降低]，因为认知控制系统可以在社会威胁情况下缓冲消极的情感反应，并且也可以用于减少在同伴在场的情况下冒险引起的奖励反应的影响。11因此，我们假设[奖励和社会痛苦敏感性，以及招募认知控制资源的倾向将与社会情境相互作用，使青少年对使他们在在场的情况下处于撞车风险的行为具有不同的敏感性 同龄人]。使用拟议方案的关键要素收集的初步数据与我们的假设一致[并表明神经测量解释了关键结果的差异，否则无法解释]。这项拟议的研究将增加对导致青少年危险行为变异的机制的理解，以及同伴影响的机制和抵抗这种影响的能力。神经认知资源的个体差异不仅可能与社会情境相互作用以促进风险，还可能有助于缓冲社会对风险的脆弱性；这项工作最终可能使我们能够开发出更有效的计划，有效地降低多个领域的风险。

DESCRIPTION (provided by applicant): Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death and a major contributor to non-fatal injury in adolescents 1, 2. Teen drivers' crash risk is especially high in the presence of teen passengers3-6. Peer influences are pervasive, powerful, especially salient during adolescence and associated with health-risk behaviors7, but the variability and mechanisms involved are not well understood8. One factor that may promote risky behavior in adolescence is a possible imbalance in brain development between affective and cognitive control systems8-10, resulting not only in riskier choices overall, but also increased reward activity during risk taking in the presence of peers11, and heightened sensitivity to social rejection12,13. In this investigation, we aim to elucidate neurocognitive predictors of: (1) risky teen driving; (2) susceptibility to peer influence in the context of teen driving; and (3) the ability to overcome risky peer influence. To achieve these aims, we propose to integrate neuroimaging (fMRI) measures into a currently funded study that experimentally manipulates peer influences in a state-of-the-art driving simulator. Main outcomes include behaviors in the simulator that are associated with high rates of injury and fatality in real drivig contexts (a composite of speeding, close following distances, traffic light violations). We hypothesize that: [(1a) increased activity in neural reward systems during a risk- taking task14, and (1b) decreased activity in cognitive control systems during a response inhibition task15, in the fMRI environment will predict higher propensity .toward risky-driving behaviors in the simulator; (2a) increased reward activity during the risk task14, and (2b) increased neural activity in regions associated with distress during exclusion16 in the neuroimaging environment will predict increased susceptibility to risk taking in the presence of peers in the driving simulator; and (3) increased neural activity in cognitive control systems will predict decreased susceptibility to peer influence in the driving simulator], as cognitive control systems could serv to buffer negative affective responses during socially threatening situations, and could also serve to reduce the impact of reward responses induced by taking risks in the presence of peers.11 As such, we hypothesize that [reward and social distress sensitivity, as well as a tendency to recruit cognitive control resources will interact with the social situation to render adolescents differentially susceptible to behaviors that put them at risk for crash in the presence of peers]. Preliminary data collected using key elements of the proposed protocol are consistent with our hypotheses [and suggest that neural measures explain variance in key outcomes that is not explained otherwise]. The proposed research will increase understanding of the mechanisms that lead to variability in risky behavior in adolescents, as well as mechanisms of peer influence and ability to resist such influence. Individual differences in neurocognitive resources may not only interact with the social situation to promote risk, but may also serve to buffer social vulnerability to risk; this work may eventually allow us to develop more effective programs that efficiently reduce risk across multiple domains.