Background
Multiple studies have found a reduced reward positivity (RewP) among individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD). Event-related potential studies have also reported blunted neural responses to pleasant pictures in MDD as reflected by the late positive potential (LPP). These deficits have been interpreted broadly in terms of anhedonia and decreased emotional engagement characteristic of depression.
Methods
In the current study, a community-based sample of 83 participants with current MDD and 45 healthy individuals performed both a guessing task and a picture viewing paradigm with neutral and pleasant pictures to assess the RewP and the LPP, respectively.
Results
We found that both RewP and LPP to pleasant pictures were reduced in the MDD group; moreover, RewP and LPP were both independent predictors of MDD status. Within the MDD group, a smaller RewP predicted impaired mood reactivity in younger but not older participants. Smaller LPP amplitudes were associated with increased anhedonia severity in the MDD group.
Conclusions
These data replicate and merge separate previous lines of research, and suggest that a blunted RewP and LPP reflect independent neural deficits in MDD – which could be used in conjunction to improve the classification of depression.
Neurocognitive impairments commonly observed in depressive disorders are thought to be reflected in reduced P300 amplitudes. To date, depression‐related P300 amplitude reduction has mostly been demonstrated cross‐sectionally, while its clinical implication for the course of depression remains largely unclear. Moreover, the relationship between P300 and specific clinical characteristics of depression is uncertain. To shed light on the functional significance of the P300 in depression, we examined whether initial P300 amplitude prospectively predicted changes in depressive symptoms among a community sample of 58 adults (mean age = 38.86 years old, 81% female) with a current depressive disorder. This sample was assessed at two‐time points, separated by approximately nine months (range = 6.6–15.9). At the initial visit, participants completed clinical interviews, self‐report measures, and a flanker task, while EEG was recorded to derive P300 amplitude. At the follow‐up visit, participants again completed the same clinical interviews and self‐report measures. Results indicated that a reduced P300 amplitude at the initial visit was associated with higher total depressive symptoms at follow‐up, even after controlling for initial depressive symptoms. These data indicate the potential clinical utility for the P300 as a neural marker of disease course among adults with a current depressive disorder. Future research may target P300 in interventions to determine whether depression‐related outcomes can be improved.
In the current article, we examined the impact of two home-delivered attentional-bias-modification (ABM) programs on a biomarker of anxiety (i.e., the error-related negativity [ERN]). The ERN is sensitivity to ABM-related changes; however, it is unclear whether ABM exerts its influence on the ERN and anxiety by increasing general attentional control or by disengaging spatial allocation of attention. In this study, we measured the ERN, anxiety, attention bias, and attention control before and after two versions of ABM training and a waitlist control group in 546 adolescents. An ABM designed to increase attention control modulated the ERN but had no impact on anxiety. An ABM designed to reduce attentional bias changed bias and self-reported anxiety in youths but had no impact on the ERN or parent-reported anxiety. These results suggest that the ERN and normative anxiety may be modified using attention training.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.