Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 26;43:100791. doi: 10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100791

Table 2.

Temperament: Overview of studies of temperament and PVS function.

First Author, Year Predictor PVS Measure Sample Size (N) Sample Gender (% Female) Age Range or M (Years) PVS Finding Estimated Effect Size (r)
Child and Adolescent Studies
 Kessel, 2017 Observed PE at age 6 LPP to pleasant images at age 9 340 46 M = 6.6 (SD = 0.5); follow up: M = 9.1, (SD = 0.4) Early PE predicted enhanced LPP .11
 Kujawa, 2015a Observed PE at age 3, self-reported PE at age 9 RewP to reward feedback 381 45 M = 3.6 (SD = 0.3); M = 9.2 (SD = 0.4) Both measures of PE positively predicted RewP .11−.12
 Speed, 2015 Self-reported E, PE, N LPP to pleasant images 523 100 13.5−15.5 E and PE positively associated with LPP .10−.14
 Speed, 2018 Self-reported PE, N RewP to reward feedback 508 100 13.5−15.5 PE positively associated with ΔRewP at low and average N .09−.12
Adult Studies
 Beaver, 2006 Self-reported BAS BOLD response to images of appetizing food 12 58 M = 22.0 (SD = 2.4) BAS positively correlated with VS .80
 Canli, 2001 Self-reported E BOLD response to pleasant images 14 100 19−42 E positively correlated with striatum .82−.86
 Cohen, 2005 Self-reported E BOLD response to reward anticipation, feedback S1: 17; S2: 16 S2: 44 S2: 20−27 E positively correlated with VS to reward feedback .56−.61
 Cooper, 2014 Self-reported E ERP response to reward feedback 38 47 19−42 E positively correlated with RewP .36
 Geaney, 2015 Self-reported BAS Effort expended for rewards 97 59 18−44 BAS positively correlated with effort to obtain reward ---
 Haas, 2006 Self-reported E, facets BOLD response to positive words 26 54 18−28 E associated with ACC, but not with striatum ---
 Hahn, 2011 Self-reported reward sensitivity BOLD response to reward anticipation 53 55 18−47 Reward sensitivity positively correlated with VS .39
 Hutcherson, 2008 Self-reported E BOLD response to amusing films 28 100 18−21 E negatively correlated with VS .67−.71
 Kehoe, 2012 Self-reported E, N BOLD response to pleasant images 23 100 19−29 No effect on striatum ---
 Lange, 2012 Self-reported BAS RewP to feedback in an extinction learning task 85 41 20−29 BAS correlated with RewP following change from reward to non-reward .22−.26
 Mobbs, 2005 Self-reported E, N BOLD response to positive cartoons 17 47 M = 22.8 (SD = 1.9) No effect of E, N on striatum ---
 Mueller, 2014b Self-reported E RewP response to positive feedback (placebo vs. sulpiride) 86 100 18−31 E marginally predicted RewP in placebo group .30
 Rapp, 2008 Self-reported trait cheerfulness BOLD response to positive cartoons 10 100 --- No effect of cheerfulness on VS ---
 Schaefer, 2011 Self-reported E, N BOLD response to chocolate brand images 12 42 21−31 E associated with ↓ VS; N associated with ↑ VS .54−.71
 Schweckendiek, 2016 Self-reported E, N BOLD response during reward learning 20 50 19−33 No effect of E on striatum ---
 Simon, 2010 Self-reported BAS BOLD response to reward anticipation, feedback 24 54 M = 24.8 (SD = 3.2) BAS positively correlated with VS to reward feedback .44
 Smillie, 2011 Self-reported E RewP to reward feedback 30 47 M = 23.4 (SD = 5.1) E positively correlated with RewP .46
 Suslow, 2010 Self-reported E, implicit IAT E BOLD response to happy faces 30 100 M = 23.0 (SD = 1.8) No effect of E on striatum ---
 Weinberg, 2018 Self-reported PE LPP to rewarding images 205 77 M = 19.3 (SD = 1.8) Low PE predicted ↓ LPP .17
 Wu, 2014 Self-reported trait positive/negative arousal BOLD response to reward anticipation 52 56 21−75 PE positively correlated with VS .31

Note: ACC = anterior cingulate cortex; BAS = behavioral activation system; BOLD = blood oxygen level dependent; E = extraversion; ERP = event-related potentials; IAT = Implicit Association Test; LPP = late positive potential; mPFC = medial prefrontal cortex; N = neuroticism; PE = positive emotionality; RewP = reward positivity; VS = ventral striatum; Δ = change.