Page 17 - Like me, or else... - Michelle Achterberg

General introduction
Figure 2. Neurodevelopmental models of social emotion regulation. Left: a schematic depiction of the Social Information Processing Network (SIPN), adapted from Nelson, Pine and Tone (2005). Right: the Imbalance model, adapted from Casey, Jones and Hare (2008).
Hot vs. Cool Control
In line with the neurodevelopmental models, previous experimental neuroimaging studies have shown that children become better at regulating their emotions with increasing age (Silvers et al., 2012), which has been suggested to be related to the development of cognitive control (Diamond, 2013; Casey, 2015). The DLPFC has been specifically pointed out as an important region for cognitive control development (Luna et al., 2004; Luna et al., 2010; Crone and Steinbeis, 2017). Most of these studies have focused on ‘cool’ cognitive control, that is to say self-control in a non-emotional setting (Welsh and Peterson, 2014). However, whether the same ‘cool’ regulatory control functions are also important for regulation of ‘hot’ emotions in social contexts is currently unknown (Zelazo and Carlson, 2012; Welsh and Peterson, 2014). Previous studies on ‘hot’ emotional control have worked with the now famous delay discounting paradigm (Mischel et al., 1989), which estimates an individual’s preference for a smaller immediate reward over larger, delayed rewards (Eigsti et al., 2006; Olson et al., 2007; Scheres et al., 2014). This classic paradigm has been used extensively, as it is suitable for participants in all age ranges, and has shown to be predictive of long-term life outcomes (i.e., Mischel et al. (1989); Casey et al. (2011); but see Watts et al. (2018) for more nuanced findings using a replication design). These studies showed that the ability to delay gratification is very difficult for young children and improves with increasing age (Mischel et al., 1989; Olson et al., 2009; Casey et al., 2011; de Water et al., 2014). Studies in adults and adolescents additionally showed that stronger structural brain connectivity between subcortical (VS)
1
15