The valuation of one’s self-worth, i.e., self-esteem, is derived from social feedback throughout life. During adolescence, the period between ages 10 to 19, many changes occur in one's social...Show moreThe valuation of one’s self-worth, i.e., self-esteem, is derived from social feedback throughout life. During adolescence, the period between ages 10 to 19, many changes occur in one's social environment– peers gain importance, and dependency on parents decreases. However, parents continue to influence self-esteem. Although the early parent-child relationship has been linked to self-esteem formation, it is unclear how perceived parenting climate influences self-esteem updating in adolescence in response to peer feedback, as these mechanisms have only been studied in young adults (individuals aged 18–25). This study used self-reports about perceived parenting, alongside computational modelling and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate how parenting climate co-varies with neurocognitive mechanisms supporting self-esteem formation in 61 healthy adolescents (Mage = 15.8; SD age = 1.42). The adolescents performed a social evaluation task during fMRI scanning which required them to predict “likes” or “dislikes” from two groups of raters and to rate their self-esteem every 2 to 3 trials. Using a computational model, we extracted a set of variables about the adolescents’ self-esteem in response to the task and performed a canonical correlation analysis to link it to a set of self-reports collected about parenting climate. The canonical correlation analysis yielded a single significant canonical dimension, Wilks’s λ = 0.04, F(117,305) = 1.35, p = 0.022, which we labelled “positive parenting”. “Positive parenting” was associated with high levels of perceived maternal care, low maternal conflict, and low emotional abuse. Adolescents scoring higher on this dimension exhibited more responsive, fluctuating self-esteem (higher self-esteem instability) compared to their lower-scoring peers, 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 0.31. Our study in adolescents did not find activation in 𝑤1 neural regions that were previously proposed to represent the neural processes underlying self-esteem formation in young adults (VS/sgACC: z = 1.84, p = 0.065; vmPFC: z = 0.50, p = 0.618). Lastly, adolescents scoring lower on this dimension did not present with a neural phenotype of psychiatric vulnerability previously found in young adults (AI responses to SPEs ρ(59) = 0.028, p = 0.831; insula-vmPFC functional connectivity ρ(59) = 0.045, p = 0.731). This study suggests that more responsive, fluctuating self-esteem associated with the “positive parenting” dimension may be adaptive in the developmental stage of adolescence, and that developmental differences may be present in neurocognitive mechanisms supporting self-esteem updating in adolescents versus in young adults.Show less
Social feedback learning can be seen as the way we learn based on either acceptance or rejection of others. The purpose of this paper is to look into how different personality characteristics such...Show moreSocial feedback learning can be seen as the way we learn based on either acceptance or rejection of others. The purpose of this paper is to look into how different personality characteristics such as fear of negative evaluation and self-esteem influence this social feedback learning. The reason for this is that previous research has found differing findings. Whilst some suggest that fear of negative evaluation increases both reaction time in social evaluative tasks as well as prediction accuracy from negative feedback, others suggest that this occurs automatically (due to negativity bias), and thus is not influenced by the degree of fear of negative evaluation. To investigate this, 175 adult participants (30 (17.14%) = male; 145 (82.86%) = female) were asked to fill out the BFNES questionnaire to measure fear of negative evaluation as well as the RSES questionnaire to measure self-esteem. They were subsequently asked to do the Social Judgement Paradigm, in which they would predict either positive or negative feedback from a peer. After this, they were given the actual feedback. Following this, they were asked to evaluate the peer again. If their prediction was correct, social feedback learning had occurred. Additionally, their reaction time was measured. Results showed a significant moderate negative relationship between fear of negative evaluation and self-esteem. However, the degree of fear of negative evaluation did not influence reaction time in the social judgement paradigm, nor the prediction accuracy from negative feedback. However, both people with low fear of negative evaluation and high fear of negative evaluation did exhibit social feedback learning in the prediction task. This paper provides greater insight into the influence of fear of negative evaluation on social feedback learning.Show less
Proper social behavior is learned through a process of social feedback from others, such as punishments and rewards. The striatum is important for feedback-based learning, as it is considered the...Show moreProper social behavior is learned through a process of social feedback from others, such as punishments and rewards. The striatum is important for feedback-based learning, as it is considered the reward center of the brain. This process could be dysfunctional in individuals exhibiting antisocial behavior, which could be explained by differences in striatum-activity after receiving social feedback. Non-clinically diagnosed participants (N=28, ages 18-30) were asked to fill out the Youth Psychopathic Traits Inventory (YPI) to determine their level of antisocial behavioral traits. During a Social Network Aggression Task (SNAT), the participants received positive, neutral, or negative feedback, accompanied by a picture of a peer on the participants’ profile, while in an MRI scanner to measure striatum activity. Participants could retaliate after feedback by sending noise blasts to their peer. No main effect of YPI scores on striatum activity was found, but only after adjusting for sex. No main effect of YPI scores on noise blast duration was found either. Female participants were found to potentially discriminate more between noise blast duration sent depending on the feedback valence received, compared to male participants. Our results do not support antisocial behavior being related to a defect in social reward-based learning in non-clinical individuals, but only after correcting for sex. Sex was found to be a confounding variable when analyzing antisocial behavior, which has not always been corrected in current literature.Show less
Fluctuations in self-esteem help us monitor social acceptance and potential social threats, such as rejection. However, how people interpret and react to social acceptance and rejection depends on...Show moreFluctuations in self-esteem help us monitor social acceptance and potential social threats, such as rejection. However, how people interpret and react to social acceptance and rejection depends on individual differences in how sensitive people are to rejection. Highly rejectionsensitive individuals anxiously expect, readily perceive and overreact to rejection. This study examined how individual differences in rejection sensitivity modulate self-esteem fluctuations in response to social feedback. Participants (n = 190; age - range = 17 - 38) performed a task that entailed receiving acceptance and rejection feedback from raters who differed in their propensity to provide acceptance feedback. Participants were asked to indicate whether they expected the raters to like them and repeatedly reported on their momentary self-esteem after receiving feedback. The findings indicate that self-esteem increased in response to acceptance feedback and decreased in response to rejection feedback, and these effects were exacerbated when rejection was unexpected. Further analyses with a subset of participants (n = 165; age - range = 17 - 31) who completed a rejection sensitivity questionnaire revealed a potential mechanism through which rejection sensitivity may give rise to psychopathology. In addition to expecting rejection more often than participants with low rejection sensitivity levels, highly rejection-sensitive participants showed larger decreases in self-esteem in response to rejection and larger increases in self-esteem in response to acceptance feedback. This sensitivity may exacerbate declines in self-esteem in response to rejection instances in their day-to-day interactions, making them more vulnerable to developing persistent low self-esteem and, ultimately, mental health issues.Show less
The valuation of one’s self-worth, i.e., self-esteem, is derived from social feedback throughout life. During adolescence, the period between ages 10 to 19, many changes occur in one's social...Show moreThe valuation of one’s self-worth, i.e., self-esteem, is derived from social feedback throughout life. During adolescence, the period between ages 10 to 19, many changes occur in one's social environment– peers gain importance, and dependency on parents decreases. However, parents continue to influence self-esteem. Although the early parent-child relationship has been linked to self-esteem formation, it is unclear how perceived parenting climate influences self-esteem updating in adolescence in response to peer feedback, as these mechanisms have only been studied in young adults (individuals aged 18–25). This study used self-reports about perceived parenting, alongside computational modelling and functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to investigate how parenting climate co-varies with neurocognitive mechanisms supporting self-esteem formation in 61 healthy adolescents (Mage = 15.8; SD age = 1.42). The adolescents performed a social evaluation task during fMRI scanning which required them to predict “likes” or “dislikes” from two groups of raters and to rate their self-esteem every 2 to 3 trials. Using a computational model, we extracted a set of variables about the adolescents’ self-esteem in response to the task and performed a canonical correlation analysis to link it to a set of self-reports collected about parenting climate. The canonical correlation analysis yielded a single significant canonical dimension, Wilks’s λ = 0.04, F(117,305) = 1.35, p = 0.022, which we labelled “positive parenting”. “Positive parenting” was associated with high levels of perceived maternal care, low maternal conflict, and low emotional abuse. Adolescents scoring higher on this dimension exhibited more responsive, fluctuating self-esteem (higher self-esteem instability) compared to their lower-scoring peers, 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑜𝑛𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑤1 = 0.31. Our study in adolescents did not find activation in neural regions that were previously proposed to represent the neural processes underlying self-esteem formation in young adults (VS/sgACC: z = 1.84, p = 0.065; vmPFC: z = 0.50, p = 0.618). Lastly, adolescents scoring lower on this dimension did not present with a neural phenotype of psychiatric vulnerability previously found in young adults (AI responses to SPEs ρ(59) = 0.028, p = 0.831; insula-vmPFC functional connectivity ρ(59) = 0.045, p = 0.731). This study suggests that more responsive, fluctuating self-esteem associated with the “positive parenting” dimension may be adaptive in the developmental stage of adolescence, and that developmental differences may be present in neurocognitive mechanisms supporting self-esteem updating in adolescents versus in young adults.Show less
ow self-esteem lies at the core of various psychiatric disorders. Emotional maltreatment during childhood is associated with low self-esteem and elevated sensitivity to social rejection later in...Show moreow self-esteem lies at the core of various psychiatric disorders. Emotional maltreatment during childhood is associated with low self-esteem and elevated sensitivity to social rejection later in life. However, it is unclear how childhood emotional maltreatment impacts on the extent to which moment-to-moment self-esteem is shaped by social evaluation. This study examined associations between retrospectively reported emotional maltreatment and self-esteem reactivity in response to social evaluation. Young adult participants (n = 78; 55 female) reported on childhood emotional abuse and neglect and current trait self-esteem. Since behavioural data collection was not possible due to the COVID-19 pandemic, I created a simulated dataset by matching participants’ self-report data to self-esteem responsivity data from other participants with identical trait self-esteem scores who performed a social evaluation task. Results showed that childhood abuse and neglect were negatively related to trait self-esteem. Task data revealed that approval increased self-esteem and disapproval decreased it. Simulated data showed no evidence of emotional abuse and neglect moderating self-esteem responsivity to social evaluation. These findings suggest that, while childhood maltreatment is linked to low trait self-esteem later in life, lower self-esteem is likely not caused by greater self-esteem reactivity to social evaluation. These findings highlight the need to research alternative pathways by which a history of emotional maltreatment may contribute to the maintenance of low self-esteem.Show less
How people generally evaluate their self-worth (i.e., their trait self-esteem) determines the extent to which they use social feedback to update their momentary self-esteem. However, it remains...Show moreHow people generally evaluate their self-worth (i.e., their trait self-esteem) determines the extent to which they use social feedback to update their momentary self-esteem. However, it remains unclear if the lack of positive expectations, typical of those with low trait self-esteem, renders them more prone to momentary changes of self-esteem. This study investigated how inter-individual differences in trait self-esteem and expectedness of social feedback moderated the impact of social approval and disapproval (i.e., valence of feedback) on self-esteem updates. Participants (N = 78) performed a social evaluation task, where they repeatedly predicted whether they expected to be approved of or not, and subsequently reported on their level of selfesteem after receiving the social feedback. Results showed that self-esteem updated depending on the valence of feedback, but expectations were only relevant if the person was exposed to social disapproval. To be precise, in both high and low trait self-esteem participants, self-esteem decreased the most when they expected to receive approval but were given disapproval instead. Low trait self-esteem was associated with lower state self-esteem throughout the task, and compared to high, low self-esteem participants had a more unstable self-esteem when faced with repeated social evaluations. However, the extent to which state self-esteem increased following approval and decreased with disapproval was no different from people with high trait selfesteem. These findings suggest that despite their vulnerabilities to social feedback, low selfesteem individuals benefit from social approval and realistic expectations as much as people with higher trait self-esteem. Knowledge of these effects can aid in the creation of interventions to promote a healthy development of self-esteem.Show less
