Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: Biol Psychiatry Cogn Neurosci Neuroimaging. 2019 Apr 15;4(8):715–725. doi: 10.1016/j.bpsc.2019.03.014

Figure 3. Frontoinsular response to task predicts future negative affect.

Figure 3.

Two multiple regression analyses tested the associations between task-related functional connectivity in a priori frontoinsular networks and future negative affect intensity and lability (maximum score on, or standard deviation in, daily diary report of negative affect on the Positive and Negative Affect Scale-Negative Subscale, PANAS-N, over follow-up). In the first regression, task-related (A) hypoconnectivity between insula and regions of frontoparietal network (FN), and (B) hyperconnectivity between insula and regions of default network (DN), were each associated with higher intensity of future negative affect, but task-related functional connectivity (C) among regions of FN or (D) among regions of DN, was not associated with intensity of negative affect. In the second regression, task-related (E) hypoconnectivity between insula-FN and (F) hyperconnectivity between insula-DN were also associated with higher lability of future negative affect, but associations failed to emerge between (G) within-FN or (H) within-DN connectivity and negative affect lability. Note: On y-axis, PANAS-N measures are normalized and residualized for demographic covariates (age and gender) and baseline positive and negative affect (PANAS-N, PANAS-P); on x-axis, task-related network functional connectivity is normalized and residualized for covariates. Reported are standardized ß from regression analyses. A significant ß represents a significant independent variable in the regression, *p<0.05.