Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Wiley Open Access Collection logoLink to Wiley Open Access Collection
. 2026 May 8;68:e70164. doi: 10.1002/dev.70164

Associations Between New Mothers’ Neural Reward Response and Perceptions of Their Own Infant

Kaylin E Hill 1,✉, Julia Garon‐Bissonnette 2, McKenzie N Greene 1, Emilia F Cárdenas 2, Maya Jackson 2, Samantha Pegg 2, Kathryn L Humphreys 2, Autumn Kujawa 2
PMCID: PMC13155177  PMID: 42101364

ABSTRACT

Reward responsiveness is a key process in social motivation and may support important caregiver social processes such as caregiver perceptions of their infant. Reward responsiveness is commonly measured at the neural level via the reward positivity (RewP), an event‐related potential derived from electroencephalogram (EEG), in both monetary and social domains. The current study examined whether and to what degree the RewP, in response to monetary and personally salient social reward feedback, relates to mothers’ perceptions of their infant during the early postpartum period (mean = 9.23 weeks post birth). Mothers (N = 91) completed two reward tasks while continuous EEG was recorded and provided descriptors of their infant's personality. The RewP was measured in response to a novel social incentive delay task (i.e., “winning” allowed participants to view a photo of their own infant) as well as a standard monetary incentive delay task. Both the social RewP and monetary RewP shared positive associations with mothers’ perceptions of their infant (social: β = 0.39, 95% CI [0.07, 0.71], p = 0.016; monetary: β = 0.39, 95% CI [0.07, 0.71], p = 0.017). Together, results suggest mothers’ neural motivational systems are related to how they perceive their child, with implications for understanding caregiver functioning and the caregiver–child relationship as context for child development.

1. Introduction

Caregiving relationships—that is, relationships between parents and children—are considered to be essential to child survival and related to individual differences in child well‐being (Bowlby 1983; Humphreys et al. 2024). One way to capture qualities of parent−infant relationships during early life is through parents’ perceptions of their infant (King et al. 2021). Parents’ perceptions of their infant are related to their own experiences from childhood (Malone et al. 2010), pregnancy‐related factors (Pajulo et al. 2006), prenatal care experiences (Hill et al. 2025), social support (Pajulo et al. 2001), and exposure to stress (Bailes et al. 2024). Importantly, parents’ perceptions of their infant are associated with gray matter changes in the postpartum period (Kim et al. 2010) as well as their parenting styles, their relationships with their child, and their child's development (Sigel and McGillicuddy‐De Lisi 2002). For example, even a single description of their child's personality, provided by parents prenatally, is associated with later observed parenting (Guyon‐Harris et al. 2021). Given the importance of parent perceptions of their infant, the current study examines an important gap in the literature—whether and to what degree parent perceptions are associated with neural motivational systems, which play an important role in supporting parent functioning and well‐being in the early postpartum period.

The psychosocial and neurobiological changes that occur in the peripartum period may, in part, be associated with the demands of caregiving and transition to the caregiver role (Cárdenas et al. 2020). In the early postpartum period, prioritized processing of infant cues may increase approach motivation to support necessary caregiving responses (Ferrey et al. 2016). Approach motivation is a broad domain that can be measured across several subdomains (Olino 2016), and reward has been implicated as a key process in supporting mental and physical health such that decreased reward responsiveness is associated with poorer health outcomes (Salovey et al. 2000; Tugade et al. 2004; Zald and Treadway 2017). Most research on reward responsiveness has focused on monetary reward, and growing evidence supports that social reward plays an important role in supporting health and social functioning (Distefano et al. 2018; Ethridge and Weinberg 2018; Kujawa 2024). Cumulative evidence across human and animal neuroscience indicates that social interactions are processed in the reward system. For example, maternal care and social attachment behaviors are driven by dopamine activity in the striatum (Krach et al. 2010). Within families, parent–child social interactions may play an important role in supporting reward functioning for both parent and child. In sum, mothers’ perceptions of their infant is an important component of the early mother−infant relationship, particularly as it sets the stage for caregiving behaviors, and these perceptions may be supported by neural reward responsiveness.

One way to measure reward responses is via the reward positivity (RewP), a neurophysiological component derived from electroencephalogram (EEG; Foti et al. 2011; Proudfit 2015). This method of reward response assessment at the neural level offers significant advantages in that it is quick, cost‐efficient, can assess reward across multiple domains, and is flexible to participant needs. For example, reward responses to monetary wins and social gains can be examined in approximately 30 min. To date, two studies have examined the RewP in relation to mother–infant relationships, specifically mothers’ feelings of affiliation or bond with their infants. First, a larger monetary RewP observed in pregnancy was prospectively associated with higher feelings of bonding in postpartum mothers. Larger maternal reward responses were specifically associated with greater maternal‐reported pleasure in close proximity to their infants (Mulligan et al. 2021). Close emotional proximity between parents and infants supports parent–infant attachment security as well as reductions in parent burnout (Blanchard et al. 2023). Second, we recently demonstrated that the social RewP, observed in response to a personally salient social reward task, interacted with self‐reported bonding difficulties to predict postpartum depression. Specifically, bonding difficulties were associated with higher depression symptoms only for mothers low in social reward responsiveness (Cárdenas et al. 2025). Taken together, this emerging line of work linking maternal reward responsiveness with facets of the mother−infant relationship suggests these neural and perceptual processes may be importantly linked.

Mothers’ neural reward processing may support more positive perceptions of the infant and caregiving approach behaviors, providing greater opportunity for co‐experiencing positive emotions and further supporting relationship quality (Brown et al. 2021). Shared positive emotions in the parent–infant context may be temporally driven by parent delight in their child. The importance of a parent's delight in their child has been discussed for decades (Barish 2004; Bradley et al. 1997; Gottman 2011), and in the neuroscience literature, delight has been defined as a mother's neural reward responses to pictures of her own infant's face in contrast to faces of other infants (Bartels and Zeki 2004; Leibenluft et al. 2004; Nitschke et al. 2004; Strathearn et al. 2008). In line with this work, our group has recently demonstrated that reward responses to feedback leading to a photo of the participant's own infant are also captured by the RewP (Cárdenas et al. 2025). It is unknown the degree to which associations between parental perception of their infant and parental reward responses are generalized (i.e., across types of reward) or domain specific (e.g., monetary vs. social reward). Mulligan et al. (2021) demonstrated that maternal reward responses to monetary incentives were prospectively associated with maternal reports of postpartum attachment. Further, Cárdenas et al. (2025) demonstrated that maternal social reward responses played an important role in the association between maternal reports of bonding difficulties and depression symptoms. The present study will extend previous work in two primary ways. First, by examining how parents perceive their infant rather than the parent–infant bond, which includes perceptions of their infant, themselves as a caregiver, and the relationship between them and their infant; and second, by examining parent reward responsiveness in both social and monetary domains. Together, identifying these associations may help to identify possible intervention targets to support caregiver social processes and the parent–infant relationship.

In summary, the present study examined whether and to what degree individual differences in the RewP, assessed in two reward domains, relate to mothers’ perceptions of their infant in the early postpartum period. We use the term mothers because all participants in the present sample identified as women. We examined the RewP during a novel social reward task wherein participants viewed images of their own infant and a standard monetary incentive reward task and tested the RewP in both tasks in relation to the tone of descriptors mothers provided when describing their infant's personality. We hypothesized that mothers’ heightened reward responses across domains would relate to more positively valenced perceptions of their infant. Given the potential enhanced saliency of infant cues, we expected specificity in that the association between the social RewP and perceptions of the infant would be larger than the association between the monetary RewP and perceptions of the infant.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

Pregnant people were recruited to participate in a longitudinal study on peripartum depression through prenatal care clinics and advertisements distributed to the broader community, on social media platforms, and across Vanderbilt University Medical Center. Eligibility criteria included being pregnant and approximately 20 weeks gestation at enrollment, between the ages of 18 and 40 years old, fluent in English, and having no previous diagnosis of mania/bipolar disorders, psychosis, or borderline personality disorder. Individuals pregnant with multiples or carrying a fetus with a known congenital condition were excluded. In total, 120 participants from the Nashville metropolitan area were enrolled in the study at 20 weeks gestation. For a full description of participant demographics for those enrolled in the study, please see Cárdenas et al. 2025)1.

Relevant to the current study, participants were invited to complete an additional study visit at 8 weeks postpartum. At this session, participants (N = 91) were 22–40 years of age (M = 31.50, SD = 4.38). Participants were 83.52% White, 3.29% Asian, 5.49% Black or African American, and 7.69% other racial identities. As noted above, all participants identified as women. Most participants were in a partnership (89.28% married or in a domestic partnership, 4.76% single or never married, and 4.76% divorced) and were pregnant with their first child (59.34% no prior children, 31.86% pregnant with second child, 5.49% pregnant with third child, 2.19% pregnant with fourth child, and 1.09% pregnant with fifth child). Participants reported annual household income as follows: 1.09% $0–5000, 1.09% $5001‐–15,000, 2.19% $15,001–‐30,000, 17.58% $30,001–‐60,000, 20.87% $60,001–90,000, 34.65% $90,0001–150,000, and 23.07% > $150,000. Most were currently employed for wages (85.71% employed for wages, 5.49% homemakers, 2.19% out of work and looking for work, 3.29% students, 2.19% self‐employed, and 1.09% other status).

2.2. Procedure

Study procedures were approved by the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board. At approximately 8 weeks postpartum, participants attended a lab visit and completed a series of EEG assessments, including the monetary incentive delay (MID) task and the personally salient social incentive delay task. Task order was counterbalanced across participants. Participants also provided open‐ended descriptions of their infant's personality, which were later coded for tone. The full postpartum assessment lasted approximately 2 h. Participants received financial compensation for their time.

2.3. Measures

2.3.1. Perception of the Infant

To assess mothers’ perceptions of their infants, participants completed a survey item adapted from the Working Model of the Child Interview (WMCI; Zeanah and Benoit 1995). Participants were asked to list up to five adjectives or phrases that described their infant's personality during the postpartum visit. Descriptions were coded for emotional tone on a continuous scale from negative (−1) to positive(1) according to experts in the field of infant and childhood health (Hill et al. 2024). Out of 814 descriptions, 138 (16.95%) did not match descriptions within the expert rating dataset. When a description provided in the current sample was not available in the expert rating dataset, the authorship team independently rated and reached consensus to interpolate the related category score, similar to the procedure cited in previous work (Hill et al. 2025). Tone across all of the provided descriptions ranged from −1 to 1 (Mean = 0.62, SD = 0.52). The tone of each description provided was averaged to quantify each mother's perception of their infant.

2.3.2. MID Task

The MID task (Novak and Foti 2015) was administered to assess neural responses to monetary gain and loss. At the start of each trial, participants were shown one of two cues that signaled trial type: a blue‐outlined circle containing a dollar sign indicated a monetary reward trial, while a white‐outlined circle without the dollar sign indicated a neutral (no reward) trial. See Figure 1. The cue was presented for 500 ms, followed by a fixation cross (anticipation period) that lasted 2000–2500 ms.

FIGURE 1.

FIGURE 1

Open in a new tab

Visual of the monetary incentive delay (MID) and social incentive delay tasks. Top is a visual of an incentive trial within the MID task. Below is an example incentive trial for the personally salient social incentive delay task.

Participants were instructed to press the left mouse button as quickly as possible when a white square (the target) appeared on the screen. Target presentation time began at 200 ms and was adjusted to maintain approximately a 50% success rate: it increased by 10 ms after unsuccessful trials and decreased by 10 ms after each successful trial. Feedback following responses varied based on performance and trial type. On monetary trials, a successful response triggered a green upward arrow and a monetary reward of $0.40, while an unsuccessful response resulted in a red downward arrow and a monetary loss of $0.20. On neutral trials, participants received a yellow dash as feedback, regardless of performance, and were not awarded or penalized monetarily. Participants were instructed to respond as quickly as possible on all trials, including non‐reward trials, to ensure consistent engagement.

The task began with 10 practice trials (eiht incentive and two non‐incentive), followed by 72 experimental trials (50 incentive and 22 non‐incentive), divided into two blocks of 36 trials each. A short break was provided between blocks. After completing the task, participants were informed of their total earnings. The full task duration was approximately 10 min. Analyses focused on the neural response to reward versus loss feedback. To ensure reliable estimation of the RewP, participants were required to have at least 12 artifact‐free trials per condition (reward and loss) to be included in analyses (Ethridge and Weinberg 2018). Participants were provided compensation for the monetary amount earned in the task.

2.3.3. Personally Salient Social Incentive Delay Task

Adapted from the MID task, the personally salient social incentive delay task was designed to assess neural responses to performance‐based social feedback in the postpartum period (Cárdenas et al. 2025). The structure of the task mirrored the MID, but feedback was based on infant or rock images rather than monetary win or loss. See Figure 1. Similar to the MID task, each trial began with a cue displayed for 500 ms: a solid blue circle indicated a social incentive trial, and a blue‐outlined circle indicated a non‐incentive trial. This was followed by a fixation cross lasting 2000–2500 ms.

Participants were instructed to press the left mouse button as quickly as possible in response to a white square target. Target duration was adjusted based on performance to maintain an approximate 50% success rate, beginning at 200 ms and adjusted by ± 10 ms based on success or failure. A fixation cross followed the response window, and the total time from target onset to feedback onset was held constant at 1500 ms.

On incentive trials, a green upward arrow indicated a successful response, followed by a 1000 ms fixation cross and a 2000 ms display of a photograph of the participant's own infant. Unsuccessful responses resulted in a red downward arrow, followed by a fixation cross and an image of rocks for 2000 ms. On non‐incentive trials, participants received a yellow dash as feedback, followed by a fixation cross and a blank screen, regardless of performance.

The social incentive delay task consisted of 10 practice trials (eight incentive and two non‐incentive), followed by 72 experimental trials (50 incentive and 22 non‐incentive), divided into two blocks of 36 trials each. Each block featured a different infant and rock photograph. The full task duration was approximately 15 min. EEG data from the social incentive delay task were processed using the same criteria as the MID task, including the requirement of at least 12 artifact‐free trials per condition (reward vs. loss) for inclusion in RewP analyses.

2.3.4. EEG Data Collection and Processing

Continuous EEG data were recorded with 32‐electrode system based on the standard 10/20 layout and using BrainProducts actiCHamp system (Munich, Germany). At the beginning of the study, we used only 16 cap electrodes (n = 7) to reduce preparation and close contact time due to recommendations early in the COVID‐19 pandemic (Simmons and Luck 2020). Later in the study, facial electrodes were attached 1 cm above and below the left eye and 1 cm from the corners of each eye to measure electrooculogram, with a reference electrode placed behind the participant's neck per the BrainProducts bipolar‐to‐auxiliary adapter design. When a facial electrode was not available to account for eye movements during ocular correction, including for 16‐channel assessments, eye movements were accounted for using channels FP1 with common reference for vertical eye movements and FT9 with FT10 as reference for horizontal eye movements (Pegg et al. 2024). To account for eye movements, 34 participants used the standard VEO/HEO facial electrodes, 27 did not use facial electrodes (instead using cap electrodes), 22 had either VEO or HEO replaced due to noise, and one participant did not have any available channels for ocular correction. Conductive gel was used to reduce impedances below 10 k Ω at each electrode. Data were referenced offline to the average of the mastoid electrodes (TP9 and TP10). Data were digitized using a 24‐bit resolution and 1000 Hz sampling rate.

After recording, data were analyzed using BrainVision Analyzer software (BrainProducts, Munich, Germany). Data were bandpass filtered with cutoffs of 0.1 and 30 Hz. Data were corrected for ocular movements according to regression‐based approaches (Gratton et al. 1983). For the participants who did not use facial electrodes, ocular correction was completed using altered electrooculogram procedures. We have previously demonstrated these altered electrooculogram procedures do not affect RewP magnitude and data quality (Pegg et al. 2024). See the Results for effects regarding ocular electrode differences in the present data. Data were segmented 200 ms prior to and 1000 ms following feedback. Faulty recordings at single electrodes were interpolated using the signal from surrounding electrodes. Artifacts were removed using a semi‐automatic procedure. Artifacts were automatically detected if voltage steps were > 50 µV; maximum voltage difference 175 µVoutside the minimal allowed amplitude of −200 µV and maximal allowed amplitude of 200 µV; and lowest allowed activity was 0.50 µV within 100 ms intervals. This automatic procedure was followed by visual inspection of the data to remove any remaining artifacts. ERPs were averaged separately across reward and loss trials in each incentive delay task and baseline corrected to the window 200 ms prior to feedback for both tasks. In accordance with previous studies (Cárdenas et al. 2025; Ethridge and Weinberg 2018), the RewP was scored from 250 to 350 ms at Cz for both tasks.

For the MID task, usable EEG data from 84 participants were included. Six participants were excluded due to excessive noise or baseline correction issues, and one was excluded due to missing trigger codes. On average, participants had 24.07 segments for the win condition (SD = 2.25, range = 16–27) and 25.08 segments for the loss condition (SD = 2.27, range = 17–31). For the social incentive delay task, usable EEG data from 82 participants were included in analyses. Seven participants were excluded due to excessive noise or too few usable segments, and two were excluded due to technical issues. On average, participants had 23.52 segments for the reward condition (SD = 2.54, range = 17–28) and 24.65 segments for the loss condition (SD = 3.02, range = 15–33). A total of 80 participants completed the perception of the infant survey.

For each reward domain, RewP difference scores were calculated using unstandardized residual scores. For the social RewP unstandardized residual, the RewP to social reward was regressed onto the RewP to loss feedback. For the monetary RewP unstandardized residual, the RewP to monetary reward was regressed onto the RewP to loss feedback.

2.3.5. Data Analysis

R studio (R Core Team, 2022) version 2024.12.1 + 563, was used for all analyses. Data were compiled using tidyr and dplyr packages (Wickham et al. 2023). Descriptive statistics (i.e., mean and standard deviation) were calculated for all key study variables using the psych package (Revelle 2024); method differences were tested using between‐subject t‐tests (e.g., electrode use) in the rstatix package (Kassambara 2025), analysis of variance tests (e.g., ocular correction method), and within‐subject t‐tests (e.g., ERP condition differences) in the base R package. Split‐half reliability of ERPs using odd and even trials within conditions was calculated using Spearman–Brown formula in the splithalfr package (Pronk 2025). Bivariate associations and regression analyses were conducted in lavaan (Rosseel 2012) with full information likelihood (FIML) used to account for missing data. Spearman rank‐order correlations and confidence intervals were estimated for ordinal data (i.e., income) in the RVAideMemoire package (Herve 2025). For the main analyses, two regression models were conducted. First, we regressed mothers' perceptions of their infant onto the social RewP to reward and RewP to loss as simultaneous predictors in order to examine the association between mothers' perceptions and social reward responsiveness, controlling for responses to loss. In the second model, we regressed mother's perceptions of their infant onto the monetary RewP to win and RewP to loss as simultaneous predictors in order to examine the association between mothers’ perceptions and monetary reward responsiveness, covarying responses to loss. As secondary analyses, we conducted the same regressions, including number of electrodes used at recording, ocular correction method, and task order as covariates. Next, Steiger's z test for dependent and overlapping correlations was used to examine if observed effect sizes were statistically significantly different across reward domains using the cocor package (Diedenhofen and Musch 2015). All tests were conducted as two‐sided tests, with p < 0.05 used to indicate statistical significance. Sample size was not determined a priori for the present study aims. Post hoc sensitivity analyses were calculated using a two‐tailed test, α = 0.05, N = 91, and Power = 0.80 in G*Power (Faul et al. 2009) and revealed the detectable effect size was r = ± 0.11 for the main analyses in the present study. Brain Vision Analyzer and ggplot2 (Wickham 2016) were used to create figures.

3. Results

3.1. Preliminary Analysis of the RewP

The RewP split‐half reliability was excellent for the RewPs elicited by the social incentive delay task (reward feedback: r SB = 0.89; loss feedback: r SB = 0.87) and RewPs elicited by the MID task (reward feedback: r SB = 0.91; loss feedback: r SB = 0.83). A two‐way within‐subjects ANOVA was used to determine whether the RewP varied by task or feedback. There was a main effect of task (social incentive delay vs. MID) such that the RewP was generally larger in the MID versus social incentive delay task across feedback type, t(81) = 4.17, p < 0.001. We also observed a main effect of feedback (reward vs. loss) such that the RewP to reward was larger than the RewP to loss across tasks, t(81) = −8.92, p < 0.001. We did not, however, observe a significant task by feedback interaction, suggesting that RewP modulation by reward versus loss feedback did not statistically vary by task. Within task, the RewP to social reward versus social loss feedback differed as expected (t(81) = 5.49, p < 0.001, d = 0.61, 95% CI [0.17, 1.05]) such that the social RewP to reward feedback was larger than the social RewP to loss feedback. Similarly, the RewP to monetary reward versus loss feedback differed as expected (t(83) = 7.12, p < 0.001, d = 0.78, 95% CI [0.34, 1.22]) such that the monetary RewP to wins was larger than the monetary RewP to loss (see Figure 2). The social RewP to reward feedback, loss feedback, and residual difference did not differ by task order (all ps > 0.638). The monetary RewP to reward feedback, loss feedback, and residual difference did not differ by task order (all ps > 0.422). The social RewP to reward feedback, loss feedback, and residual difference did not differ by 16 versus 32 electrode recording (all ps > 0.356) or ocular scoring differences (all ps > 0.587). Similarly, the monetary RewP to reward feedback, loss feedback, and residual difference did not differ by 16 versus 32 electrode recording (all ps > 0.852) or ocular scoring differences (all ps > 0.565).

FIGURE 2.

FIGURE 2

Open in a new tab

RewP scalp topography and grand averaged waveforms. ERPs elicited from the monetary incentive delay (MID) task are presented in the top panel. ERPs elicited from the personally salient social incentive delay task are presented in the bottom panel. Scalp topographies present the difference of reward—loss conditions (that is, monetary win—loss for the MID task and infant feedback cue—neutral feedback cue for the social incentive delay task).

3.2. Descriptive Statistics

Table 1 presents means, standard deviations, and bivariate correlations between study variables. All RewP components were positively associated with each other. RewP residual difference scores were positively associated with reward condition RewPs (i.e., social RewP to reward feedback and monetary RewP to reward feedback) and not to non‐reward condition RewPs (i.e., social RewP to loss feedback and monetary RewP to loss feedback). RewP residual scores shared a moderate, positive association across domains. Although individual descriptions of the infant ranged from −1 to 1, parent perceptions of the infant tended to be positive when taking the average across all descriptions of the infant provided per participant.

TABLE 1.

Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations between study variables.

M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1.Social RewP to reward 10.93 5.97 1
2.Social RewP to loss 8.36 5.60

0.73

[0.62, 0.82]

(<0.001)

 1
3.Social RewP residual 0.00 4.06

0.68

[0.55, 0.78]

(<0.001)

0.00

[−0.21, 0.21]

(1.00)

 1
4.Monetary RewP to reward 12.94 6.34

0.68

[0.55, 0.78]

(<0.001)

0.55

[0.38, 0.68]

(<0.001)

0.37

[0.18, 0.54]

(0.002)

 1
5.Monetary RewP to loss 9.64 5.05

0.49

[0.32, 0.63]

(<0.001)

0.51

[0.34, 0.65]

(<0.001)

0.14

[−0.07, 0.34]

(0.214)

0.75

[0.63, 0.82]

(<0.001)

 1
6.Monetary RewP residual 0.00 4.23

0.49

[0.31, 0.63]

(<0.001)

0.25

[0.04, 0.43]

(0.045)

0.41

[0.22, 0.57]

(0.001)

0.67

[0.53, 0.77]

(<0.001)

0.00

[−0.21, 0.21]

(1.00)

 1
7.Maternal perception of their infant 0.73 0.26

0.23

[0.03, 0.42]

(0.060)

0.05

[−0.16, 0.25]

(0.692)

0.26

[0.06, 0.45]

(0.027)

0.22

[0.01, 0.41]

(0.059)

0.05

[−0.15, 0.26]

(0.643)

0.26

[0.05, 0.44]

(0.026)

 1
8.Number of children 1.55 0.80

−0.08

[−0.31, 0.14]

(0.463)

−0.12

[−0.34, 0.10]

(0.275)

0.01

[−.022, 0.24]

(0.934)

−0.11

[−0.32, 0.12]

(0.348)

−0.12

[−0.34, 0.09]

(0.267)

−0.02

[−0.25, 0.22]

(0.877)

0.11

[−0.30, 0.13]

(0.420)

9.Income

 71,621 59,248

−0.01

[−0.24, 0.24]

(0.944)

0.18

[−0.04, 0.39]

(0.098)

−0.22

[−0.43, −0.01]

(0.048)

0.06

[−0.17, 0.28]

(0.574)

0.05

[−0.15, 0.25]

(0.629)

0.05

[−0.14, 0.25]

(0.643)

0.19

[−0.05, 0.42]

(0.087)

−0.14

[−0.36, 0.07]

(0.176)
Open in a new tab

Note. Values in each cell depict the observed correlation, [95% confidence interval], and (p‐value). Maternal perception of their infant = Average tone across five personality descriptors mothers provided to describe their infant. Income = Self‐reported annual income category where 1 = $0–5000, 2 = $5001 = 15,000, 3 = $15,001–30,000, 4 = $30,001–60,000, 5 = $60,001–90,000, 6 = $90,001–150,000, and 7 = Greater than $150,000. Spearman rank‐order correlations were used to estimate income associations.

3.3. Main Analyses

The social RewP to reward shared a moderate, positive association with mother's perception of their infant when controlling for the social RewP to loss (social RewP to reward: β = 0.39, 95% CI [0.07, 0.71], z = 2.40, p = 0.016; social RewP to loss: β = −0.22, 95% CI [−0.53, 0.09], z = −1.38, p = 0.168). These associations were similarly observed in the model covarying for the number of electrodes used at recording, ocular correction method, and task order. Similarly, the monetary RewP to reward also shared a moderate, positive association with mother's perception of their infant (monetary RewP to reward: β = 0.39, 95% CI [0.07, 0.71], z = 2.38, p = 0.017; monetary RewP to loss: β = −0.23, 95% CI [−0.55, 0.09], z = −1.41, p = 0.160). These associations were similarly observed in the model controlling for number of electrodes used at recording, ocular correction method, and task order2. Further, these observed associations between perceptions and responsiveness to reward in each domain were not statistically different from each other (z difference = 0.03, p = 0.977)3. See Figure 3 for scatterplot, linear model, and confidence interval for these associations, using the RewP residual difference values for illustration purposes.

FIGURE 3.

FIGURE 3

Open in a new tab

Linear models between maternal reward responsiveness and perceptions of their infant. Scatterplot, linear model, and confidence interval for the social RewP residual (left) and the monetary RewP residual (right) with maternal perception of their infant. Social RewP = the unstandardized residual of the social RewP elicited from the personally salient social incentive delay task. Monetary RewP = the unstandardized residual of the monetary RewP elicited from the standard monetary incentive delay task. Maternal perception of their infant = average tone across five personality descriptors mothers provided to describe their infant. Higher scores indicate more positive tone.

4. Discussion

In a cross‐sectional study of 91 women in the early postpartum period, we investigated associations between mothers’ perceptions of their infant and multidomain reward responsiveness at the neural level. We measured the RewP in response to a novel, personally salient social paradigm wherein participants viewed images of their own infant and in response to a standard monetary paradigm. We also examined mother's perception of their infant according to adjectives provided in description of the infant's personality, rated on emotional tone. As hypothesized, mothers’ heightened reward responses across domains related to more positively valenced perceptions of their infant. Contrary to our hypothesis, personally salient social reward responsiveness—that is, indication that the participant “won” photos of their infant—did not demonstrate a stronger association with mother's perceptions of their infant than did monetary reward responsiveness.

Together, results suggest that neural reward responsiveness postpartum may be important for understanding mothers’ perceptions of their infants in the postpartum period. Mothers’ early perceptions of their infants, including how positively they perceive and describe their children, are critical factors related to mother−infant relationships, sensitive parenting, and subsequent attachment (Guyon‐Harris et al. 2021; Sigel and McGillicuddy‐De Lisi 2002). For decades, social cognition and developmental psychopathology research has pointed to perceptions of others as driving behaviors (Bornstein et al. 2018). Our research suggests that variations in those perceptions may be underpinned by variation in reward processes, even in domains not directly related to parenting processes (i.e., monetary reward). This work adds to growing literature linking maternal brain function, including neural reward responsiveness, to parenting processes during the transition to parenthood, a period of neurobiological and psychological change (Cárdenas et al. 2020).

The present results suggest that links between reward responses and parenting processes are more domain‐general than domain‐specific. We found mothers who were generally more responsive to reward feedback—regardless of domain—also tended to describe their infants using more positive terms. Importantly, our findings are the first to concurrently examine associations across both reward domains. They build from the work of Mulligan et al. (2021), who found that mothers’ reward responses to monetary incentives are related to mothers’ reported feelings of bonding toward their infant. Altogether, consideration of reward and perceptions in parents across the peripartum period (i.e., transition to parenthood) is sparse in comparison to research focusing on reward responses more broadly. From this view and our findings, individual differences in reward processing broadly may relate to parenting processes, rather than a process specific to infant cues. In other words, reward responsivity generally may contribute to parenting processes by increasing approach motivation across contexts. This is consistent with previous work, which demonstrated that the RewP is related to tendencies to experience positive affect and notice more positives in the environment (Dell'Acqua et al. 2024; Duttweiler et al. 2024). Alternatively, it is also possible that both reward domains contribute to mothers’ perceptions of their infant through different pathways, but in a similar magnitude. Indeed, the monetary RewP might reflect broader approach motivation across contexts, including parenting, while the social RewP may more specifically reflect tendencies to feel connected with others, including one's infant.

It is also important to note that parent perceptions of their child are influenced by external factors (Bailes et al. 2024; Hill et al. 2025; Pajulo et al. 2001; Pajulo et al. 2006). As such, it is most likely that parent perceptions are influenced by both external (e.g., lifetime or current experiences) and internal (e.g., neural approach motivational systems) processes. Additionally, the present study assessed mothers’ perceptions and reward responsiveness concurrently postpartum and cannot tease apart prospective associations. It may be that neural motivational systems underlie cognitive processes related to parent perceptions of their infant, or it may be that cognitive processes influence motivational systems function. This proposed direction of effects is in line with longstanding theories of cognitive schemas in relation to emotion and reward (Beck 1967) such that parents’ perceptions of their child may contribute to how rewarding they find interactions with them. In this way, it may also be true that the current findings may not be specific to perceptions of the infant per se but that more generally positive perceptions are associated with greater reward responsiveness. Future research examining the associations between reward responses across domains and parenting processes using different study designs and tasks, or even experimental manipulations, may help disentangle the general and specific associations between parent neural reward responsiveness and parent–child relationships in the early postpartum period. Together, disentangling these associations, as well as causal effects, may help to identify specific mechanisms and possible intervention targets to support caregiver functioning, the parent–infant relationship, and infant development.

Strengths of the current study include the multimodal study design that incorporated both reward responsiveness at the neural level and cognitive perceptions via maternal report. We were the first to examine multiple domains of reward responsiveness, including a personally salient novel social incentive delay task tied to infant cues, in the early postpartum period. Additionally, we assessed one aspect of parent–infant relationship quality in this early period by specifically focusing on maternal report of their infant's personality. Maternal perceptions of their infant were measured by coding the tone of adjectives provided to describe the infant at 8 weeks postpartum, which enabled a dimensional approach to studying very early perceptions—a key component of caregiver social processes (King et al. 2021). These findings build on previous work demonstrating that maternal perceptions of their infant specifically, rather than perceptions of parenting generally, are associated with gray matter changes in regions associated with motivation and behavior, including the hypothalamus, substantia nigra, and amygdala (Kim et al. 2010). In the present study, we focused on multidomain reward responsiveness, and we hope this compliments future studies that focus on additional positive valence systems and neural processes related to attention, emotion, and different stages of reward. For example, previous work has demonstrated that mothers who were more responsive to infant emotional faces (measured by the N170) also demonstrated higher maternal sensitivity (Bernard et al. 2015). Future work could examine associations between maternal perceptions of their infant and motivated attention via the cue‐P3, reward anticipation via the stimulus‐preceding negativity (SPN), or emotional reactivity via the late positive potential (LPP). Examining the associations amongs maternal perceptions of their infant and related but distinguishable positive valence systems and neural processes in the postpartum period would further disentangle these associations.

Limitations of this study include attrition in participation from the first to third wave of data collection, including difficulty retaining younger, first‐time mothers and Black women in the full study. Given the current study focuses on the third wave of data collection, this attrition further limits generalization of the present results. A second limitation of this study is the reliance on mother self‐report via questionnaire prompt regarding infant personality rather than the full working model interview, which allows for assessing a broader range of parent perceptions of the infant, themselves as a parent, and the parent–infant relationship. Relatedly, a third limitation is that the measurement of reward responsiveness and parent perceptions occurred at one point in time. The associations observed, in which mothers’ reward responsiveness across domains is concurrently associated with mothers’ perceptions of their infants, do not infer any directionality. It may be that reward responsivity foster approach motivation, toward the infant and resulting positive perceptions, or it may be that positive perceptions of the infant fosters approach motivation ultimately supporting intact reward responsivity—a sign of resiliency during a time marked with increased vulnerability toward depression (Batt et al. 2020). Given the increased risk and cascading effects of postpartum depression on mothers and their infants in the first year postpartum (Diego et al. 2004; Feldman et al. 2009; Letourneau et al. 2012; Slomian et al. 2019), identifying what person‐level and dyad‐level vulnerabilities may be driving increased risk is an important next step in this line of research. A third limitation is the current study did not examine infant‐level characteristics such as temperament. Temperament is not easily assessed at 8 weeks of age (Worobey and Blajda 1989) but does demonstrate a low level of stability over the first year of life (Bornstein et al. 2015). Future studies should consider both leveraging longitudinal designs and examining associations with infant characteristics.

In conclusion, the present study contributes to the literature examining early reward and social processes important for parent–infant relationships in the early postpartum period by examining the roles of both general and social domains of reward responses in relation to parent perceptions of their infant. Our research suggests that variations in maternal perceptions of their infant relate to variations in reward responsiveness, both in domains tied to parenting processes (e.g., “winning” photos of their own infant) and not directly related to parenting processes (e.g., winning money). Given the role of reward responsiveness in depression vulnerability, results suggest greater understanding of reward and social processes in this early postpartum period is warranted to support both parent and infant outcomes. Future investigations can build on this work by identifying how these processes unfold over time and additional individual‐ and context‐level characteristics that may impact the observed associations.

Author Contributions

K. E. Hill: conceptualization, methodology, data curation, formal analysis, investigation, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, project administration. J. Garon‐Bissonnette: writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. M. N. Greene: writing – original draft, writing – review and editing, visualization. E. F. Cárdenas: methodology, investigation, writing – review and editing. S. Pegg: methodology, investigation, writing – review and editing. M. Jackson: methodology, investigation, writing – review and editing. K. L. Humphreys: methodology, writing – review and editing. A. Kujawa: methodology, investigation, resources, writing – review and editing, funding acquisition.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

Research funding was provided by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH R21MH122781 to AK; K23MH131753 to KEH; F31MH127817 to SP, F31MH135650 to EFC) and Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research Grant (UL1 TR000445 from NCATS/NIH).

Endnotes

1

We compared the demographic data of participants who were included in the present analyses (n = 91) versus participants who were enrolled at the start of the study but did not complete the third study wave (n = 29). Participants who completed the third study wave tended to be older (M = 31.5 years) than those who did not complete the third study wave (M = 28.79 years; t(37.03) = 2.28, 95% CI [0.30, 5.13], p = 0.028) and tended to have more children (M = 0.56) than those who did not complete the third wave (M = 0.28; t(81.20) = 2.07, 95% CI [0.01, 0.55], p = 0.042). Participants who completed the third wave versus did not complete the third wave reported differences in race identity (p = 0.022). Specifically, participants who completed the third study wave were more likely to identify as White (n = 76; 83.52%) and less likely to identify as Black or African American (n = 5, 5.50%) than those who were enrolled in the study but did not complete the third study wave (White: n = 17; 65.38%; Black or African American: n = 7; 26.92%).

2

We additionally conducted the main regression analyses with number of children and income as covariates. In these models, key findings remained statistically significant. The social RewP to reward shared a moderate, positive association with mother's perception of their infant when controlling for the social RewP to loss, number of children, and income, β = 0.48, 95% CI [0.18, 0.79], z = 2.97, p = 0.003. The monetary RewP to reward shared a moderate, positive association with mother's perception of their infant when controlling for the monetary RewP to loss, number of children, and income, β = 0.38, 95% CI [0.07, 0.69], z = 2.30, p = 0.022.

3

When examining the variance accounted for by both the social RewP and monetary RewP simultaneously, the overall model accounted for 10% of the variance in mothers’ perceptions of their infant (R 2 = 0.10); however, neither the social RewP to win (β = 0.30, p = 0.110) nor the monetary RewP to win (β = 0.24, p = 0.225) were statistically significantly associated with mothers’ perceptions of their infant in the simultaneous model.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Bailes, L. G. , Blum A., Barnett W., et al. 2024. “Stressful Life Events and Prenatal Representations of the Child.” Attachment & Human Development 26, no. 2: 116–132. 10.1080/14616734.2024.2345242. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Barish, K. 2004. “What is Therapeutic in Child Therapy? I. Therapeutic Engagement.” Psychoanalytic Psychology 21, no. 3: 385–401. 10.1037/0736-9735.21.3.385. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bartels, A. , and Zeki S.. 2004. “The Neural Correlates of Maternal and Romantic Love.” Neuroimage 21, no. 3: 1155–1166. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.11.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Batt, M. M. , Duffy K. A., Novick A. M., Metcalf C. A., and Epperson C. N.. 2020. “Is Postpartum Depression Different From Depression Occurring Outside of the Perinatal Period? A Review of the Evidence.” Focus 18, no. 2: 2. 10.1176/appi.focus.20190045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Beck, A. T. 1967. Depression: Clinical, Experimental and Theoretical Aspects. Hoeber. [Google Scholar]
  6. Bernard, K. , Simons R., and Dozier M.. 2015. “Effects of an Attachment‐Based Intervention on Child Protective Services–Referred Mothers' Event‐Related Potentials to Children's Emotions.” Child Development 86, no. 6: 1673–1684. 10.1111/cdev.12418. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Blanchard, M. A. , Hoebeke Y., and Heeren A.. 2023. “Parental Burnout Features and the family Context: A Temporal Network Approach in Mothers.” Journal of Family Psychology 37, no. 3: 398–407. 10.1037/fam0001070. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Bornstein, M. H. , Putnick D. L., Gartstein M. A., Hahn C.‐S., Auestad N., and O'Connor D. L.. 2015. “Infant Temperament: Stability by Age, Gender, Birth Order, Term Status, and Socioeconomic Status.” Child Development 86, no. 3: 844–863. 10.1111/cdev.12367. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Bornstein, M. H. , Putnick D. L., and Suwalsky J. T. D.. 2018. “Parenting Cognitions → Parenting Practices → Child Adjustment?” Development and Psychopathology 30, no. 2: 399–416. 10.1017/S0954579417000931. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Bowlby, J. 1983. Attachment: Attachment and Loss. 2nd ed. Basic Books. https://books.google.co.in/books?id=FYEuAAAAMAAJ. [Google Scholar]
  11. Bradley, R. H. , Whiteside‐Mansell L., Brisby J. A., and Caldwell B. M.. 1997. “Parents' socioemotional Investment in Children.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 59: 77. 10.2307/353663. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Brown, C. L. , Chen K. H., Wells J. L., et al. 2021. “Shared Emotions in Shared Lives: Moments of Co‐Experienced Affect, More Than Individually Experienced Affect, Linked to Relationship Quality.” Emotion 22: 1387–1393. 10.1037/emo0000939. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Cárdenas, E. F. , Jackson M., Garon‐Bissonnette J., Humphreys K. L., and Kujawa A.. 2025. “Social Reward Responsiveness as a Moderator of the Association Between Perceived Bonding With Infants and Depressive Symptoms in Postpartum Women.” Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience 25: 1181–1191. 10.3758/s13415-025-01286-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Cárdenas, E. F. , Kujawa A., and Humphreys K. L.. 2020. “Neurobiological Changes During the Peripartum Period: Implications for Health and Behavior.” Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 15, no. 10: 1097–1110. 10.1093/scan/nsz091. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Dell'Acqua, C. , Allison G. O., Yun C. H., and Weinberg A.. 2024. “Linking Social Reward Responsiveness and Affective Responses to the Social Environment: an Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.” Psychophysiology 61, no. 10: e14640. 10.1111/psyp.14640. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Diedenhofen, B. , and Musch J.. 2015. “cocor: A Comprehensive Solution for the Statistical Comparison of Correlations.” PLoS One 10, no. 4: e0121945. 10.1371/journal.pone.0121945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Diego, M. , Field T., Hernandez‐Reif M., Cullen C., Schanberg S., and Kuhn C.. 2004. “Prepartum, Postpartum, and Chronic Depression Effects on Newborns.” Psychiatry: Interpersonal and Biological Processes 67, no. 1: 63–80. 10.1521/psyc.67.1.63.31251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Distefano, A. , Jackson F., Levinson A. R., Infantolino Z. P., JArcho J. M., and Nelson B. D.. 2018. “A Comparison of the Electrocortical Response to Monetary and Social Reward.” Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience 13, no. 3: 247–255. 10.1093/scan/nsy006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Duttweiler, H. , Granros M., Sheena M., and Burkhouse K. L.. 2024. “Neural Reward Responsiveness and Daily Positive Affect Functioning in Adolescent Girls.” International Journal of Psychophysiology 195: 112278. 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2023.112278. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Ethridge, P. , and Weinberg A.. 2018. “Psychometric Properties of Neural Responses to Monetary and Social Rewards Across Development.” International Journal of Psychophysiology 132: 311–322. 10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2018.01.011. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Faul, F. , Erdfelder E., Buchner A., and Lang A.. 2009. “Statistical Power Analyses Using G * Power 3.1: Tests for Correlation and Regression Analyses.” Behavior Research Methods 41, no. 4: 1149–1160. 10.3758/BRM.41.4.1149. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Feldman, R. , Granat A., Pariente C., Kanety H., Kuint J., and Gilboa‐Schechtman E.. 2009. “Maternal Depression and Anxiety Across the Postpartum Year and Infant Social Engagement, Fear Regulation, and Stress Reactivity.” Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry 48, no. 9: 919–927. 10.1097/CHI.0b013e3181b21651. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Ferrey, A. E. , Santascoy N., McCrory E. J., Thompson‐Booth C., Mayes L. C., and Rutherford H. J. V.. 2016. “Motivated Attention and Reward in Parenting.” Parenting 16, no. 4: 284–301. 10.1080/15295192.2016.1184928. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Foti, D. , Weinberg A., Dien J., and Hajcak G.. 2011. “Event‐Related Potential Activity in the Basal Ganglia Differentiates Rewards From Nonrewards: Temporospatial Principal Components Analysis and Source Localization of the Feedback Negativity.” Human Brain Mapping 32, no. 12: 2207–2216. 10.1002/hbm.21182. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Gottman, J. 2011. Raising an Emotionally Intelligent Child. Simon and Schuster. [Google Scholar]
  26. Gratton, G. , Coles M. G. H., and Donchin E.. 1983. “A New Method for Off‐Line Removal of Ocular Artifact.” Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology 55, no. 4: 468–484. 10.1016/0013-4694(83)90135-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Guyon‐Harris, K. L. , Carell R., Devlieger S., Humphreys K. L., and Huth‐Bocks A. C.. 2021. “The Emotional Tone of Child Descriptions During Pregnancy is Associated With Later Parenting.” Infant Mental Health Journal 42, no. 5: 731–739. 10.1002/imhj.21936. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Herve, M. 2025. RVAideMemoire: Testing and Plotting Procedures for Biostatistics (R Package Version 0.9‐83‐12) [Computer Software]. CRAN. https://cran.r‐project.org/package=RVAideMemoire. [Google Scholar]
  29. Hill, K. E. , Blum A. L., Carell R., and Humphreys K. L.. 2025. “Evidence That Prenatal Care Visit Experiences Influence Perceptions of the Child.” Communications Psychology 3, no. 1: 1–10. 10.1038/s44271-025-00256-z. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Hill, K. E. , Guyon‐Harris K. L., and Humphreys K. L.. 2024. “Data Representing Expert Ratings of Emotional Tone in Adjectives Used to Describe Infants and Young Children.” Data in Brief 55: 110745. 10.1016/j.dib.2024.110745. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Humphreys, K. L. , Garon‐Bissonnette J., Hill K. E., Bailes L. G., Barnett W., and Hare M. M.. 2024. “Caregiving Relationships Are a Cornerstone of Developmental Psychopathology.” Development and Psychopathology 36: 1–14. 10.1017/S0954579424000300. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Kassambara, A. 2025. rstatix: Pipe‐Friendly Framework for Basic Statistical Tests (R Package Version 0.7.3) [Computer Software]. CRAN. https://CRAN.R‐project.org/package=rstatix. [Google Scholar]
  33. Kim, P. , Leckman J. F., Mayes L. C., Feldman R., Wang X., and Swain J. E.. 2010. “The Plasticity of Human Maternal Brain: Longitudinal Changes in Brain Anatomy During the Early Postpartum Period.” Behavioral Neuroscience 124, no. 5: 695–700. 10.1037/a0020884. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. King, L. S. , Salo V. C., Kujawa A., and Humphreys K. L.. 2021. “Advancing the RDoC Initiative Through the Assessment of Caregiver Social Processes.” Development and Psychopathology 33: 1–17. 10.1017/S095457942100064X. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Krach, S. , Paulus F. M., Bodden M., and Kircher T.. 2010. “The Rewarding Nature of Social Interactions.” Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 4: 22. 10.3389/fnbeh.2010.00022. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Kujawa, A. 2024. “Reduced Reward Responsiveness and Depression Vulnerability: Consideration of Social Contexts and Implications for Intervention.” Psychophysiology 61, no. 6: e14528. 10.1111/psyp.14528. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Leibenluft, E. , Gobbini M. I., Harrison T., and Haxby J. V.. 2004. “Mothers' Neural Activation in Response to Pictures of Their Children and Other Children.” Biological Psychiatry 56, no. 4: 225–232. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.05.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Letourneau, N. L. , Dennis C.‐L., Benzies K., et al. 2012. “Postpartum Depression is a Family Affair: Addressing the Impact on Mothers, Fathers, and Children.” Issues in Mental Health Nursing 33, no. 7: 445–457. 10.3109/01612840.2012.673054. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Malone, J. C. , Levendosky A. A., Dayton C. J., and Bogat G. A.. 2010. “Understanding the “Ghosts in the Nursery” of Pregnant Women Experiencing Domestic Violence: Prenatal Maternal Representations and Histories of Childhood Maltreatment.” Infant Mental Health Journal 31, no. 4: 432–454. 10.1002/imhj.20264. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Mulligan, E. M. , Lowe M., Flynn H., and Hajcak G.. 2021. “The Rewards of Motherhood: Neural Response to Reward in Pregnancy Prospectively Predicts Maternal Bonding With the Infant in the Postpartum Period.” Biological Psychology 163: 108148. 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2021.108148. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Nitschke, J. B. , Nelson E. E., Rusch B. D., Fox A. S., Oakes T. R., and Davidson R. J.. 2004. “Orbitofrontal Cortex Tracks Positive Mood in Mothers Viewing Pictures of Their Newborn Infants.” Neuroimage 21, no. 2: 583–592. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.10.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Novak, K. D. , and Foti D.. 2015. “Teasing Apart the Anticipatory and Consummatory Processing of Monetary Incentives: An Event‐Related Potential Study of Reward Dynamics.” Psychophysiology 52, no. 11: 1470–1482. 10.1111/psyp.12504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Olino, T. M. 2016. “Future Research Directions in the Positive Valence Systems: Measurement, Development, and Implications for Youth Unipolar Depression.” Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology 45, no. 5: 681–705. 10.1080/15374416.2015.1118694. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Pajulo, M. , Helenius H., and Mayes L.. 2006. “Prenatal Views of Baby and Parenthood: Association With Sociodemographic and Pregnancy Factors.” Infant Mental Health Journal 27, no. 3: 229–250. 10.1002/imhj.20090. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Pajulo, M. , Savonlahti E., Sourander A., Piha J., and Helenius H.. 2001. “Prenatal Maternal Representations: Mothers at Psychosocial Risk.” Infant Mental Health Journal 22, no. 5: 529–544. 10.1002/imhj.1016. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  46. Pegg, S. , Dao A., Venanzi L., Hill K., and Kujawa A.. 2024. “The Impact of Electrode Selection for Ocular Correction on the Reward Positivity and Late Positive Potential Components in Adolescents.” Psychophysiology 62: e14497. 10.1111/psyp.14497. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Pronk, T. 2025. splithalfr: Estimates Split‐Half Reliabilities for Scoring Algorithms of Cognitive Tasks and Questionnaires (Version 3.0.0) [Computer Software]. Zenodo. 10.5281/zenodo.7777894. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  48. Proudfit, G. H. 2015. “The Reward Positivity: From Basic Research on Reward to a Biomarker for Depression.” Psychophysiology 52, no. 4: 449–459. 10.1111/psyp.12370. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Revelle, W. 2024. psych: Procedures for Psychological, Psychometric, and Personality Research (R Package Version 2.4.6) [Computer software]. Northwestern University. https://cran.r-project.org/package=psych. [Google Scholar]
  50. R Core Team . 2022. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing [Computer Software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org.
  51. Rosseel, Y. 2012. “lavaan: An R Package for Structural Equation Modeling.” Journal of Statistical Software 48, no. 2: 1–36. 10.18637/jss.v048.i02. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  52. Salovey, P. , Rothman A. J., Detweiler J. B., and Steward W. T.. 2000. “Emotional States and Physical Health.” American Psychologist 55, no. 1: 110–121. 10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.110. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  53. Sigel, I. E. , and McGillicuddy‐De Lisi A. V.. 2002. “Parent Beliefs Are Cognitions: the Dynamic Belief Systems Model.” In Handbook of Parenting: Being and Becoming a Parent, 485–508. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  54. Simmons, A. M. , and Luck S. J. . 2020. Protocol for Reducing COVID‐19 Transmission Risk in EEG Research. 10.21203/rs.3.pex-974/v2. [DOI]
  55. Slomian, J. , Honvo G., Emonts P., Reginster J.‐Y., and Bruyère O.. 2019. “Consequences of Maternal Postpartum Depression: A Systematic Review of Maternal and Infant Outcomes.” Women's Health 15: 1745506519844044. 10.1177/1745506519844044. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  56. Strathearn, L. , Li J., Fonagy P., and Montague P. R.. 2008. “What's in a Smile? Maternal Brain Responses to Infant Facial Cues.” Pediatrics 122, no. 1: 40–51. 10.1542/peds.2007-1566. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  57. Tugade, M. M. , Fredrickson B. L., and Feldman Barrett L.. 2004. “Psychological Resilience and Positive Emotional Granularity: Examining the Benefits of Positive Emotions on Coping and Health.” Journal of Personality 72, no. 6: 1161–1190. 10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00294.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  58. Wickham, H. 2016. ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis. 2nd ed. Springer International Publishing. [Google Scholar]
  59. Wickham, H. , Vaughan D., and Girlich M.. 2024. tidyr: Tidy Messy Data (R Package Version 1.3.1) [Computer Software]. CRAN. https://cran.r-project.org/package=tidyr. [Google Scholar]
  60. Worobey, J. , and Blajda V. M.. 1989. “Temperament Ratings at 2 Weeks, 2 Months, and 1 Year: Differential Stablity of Activity and Emotionality.” Developmental Psychology 25, no. 2: 257–263. 10.1037/0012-1649.25.2.257. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  61. Zald, D. H. , and Treadway M.. 2017. “Reward Processing, Neuroeconomics, and Psychopathology.” Annual Review of Clinical Psychology 13: 471–495. 10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-032816-044957. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  62. Zeanah, C. H. , and Benoit D.. 1995. “Clinical Applications of a Parent Perception Interview in Infant Mental Health.” Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Clinics of North America 4, no. 3: 539–554. 10.1016/S1056-4993(18)30418-8. [DOI] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Articles from Developmental Psychobiology are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES