Format
Sort by
Items per page

Send to

Choose Destination

Links from PubMed

Items: 1 to 20 of 52

1.

Danger Changes the Way the Mammalian Brain Stores Information About Innocuous Events: A Study of Sensory Preconditioning in Rats.

Holmes NM, Raipuria M, Qureshi OA, Killcross S, Westbrook F.

eNeuro. 2018 Feb 14;5(1). pii: ENEURO.0381-17.2017. doi: 10.1523/ENEURO.0381-17.2017. eCollection 2018 Jan-Feb.

2.

Novelty and fear conditioning induced gene expression in high and low states of anxiety.

Donley MP, Rosen JB.

Learn Mem. 2017 Aug 16;24(9):449-461. doi: 10.1101/lm.044289.116. Print 2017 Sep.

PMID:
28814471
3.

Disentangling the effects of novelty, valence and trait anxiety in the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis, amygdala and hippocampus with high resolution 7T fMRI.

Pedersen WS, Muftuler LT, Larson CL.

Neuroimage. 2017 Aug 1;156:293-301. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.05.009. Epub 2017 May 11.

PMID:
28502843
4.

GABA content within medial prefrontal cortex predicts the variability of fronto-limbic effective connectivity.

Delli Pizzi S, Chiacchiaretta P, Mantini D, Bubbico G, Edden RA, Onofrj M, Ferretti A, Bonanni L.

Brain Struct Funct. 2017 Sep;222(7):3217-3229. doi: 10.1007/s00429-017-1399-x. Epub 2017 Apr 6. Erratum in: Brain Struct Funct. 2017 Nov;222(8):3861.

5.

The effects of stimulus novelty and negativity on BOLD activity in the amygdala, hippocampus, and bed nucleus of the stria terminalis.

Pedersen WS, Balderston NL, Miskovich TA, Belleau EL, Helmstetter FJ, Larson CL.

Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2017 May 1;12(5):748-757. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsw178.

6.

Material Specificity Drives Medial Temporal Lobe Familiarity But Not Hippocampal Recollection.

Kafkas A, Migo EM, Morris RG, Kopelman MD, Montaldi D, Mayes AR.

Hippocampus. 2017 Feb;27(2):194-209. doi: 10.1002/hipo.22683. Epub 2016 Dec 26.

7.

Protein Kinase A and Anxiety-Related Behaviors: A Mini-Review.

Keil MF, Briassoulis G, Stratakis CA, Wu TJ.

Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2016 Jun 29;7:83. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2016.00083. eCollection 2016. Review.

8.

Maternal sensitivity, infant limbic structure volume and functional connectivity: a preliminary study.

Rifkin-Graboi A, Kong L, Sim LW, Sanmugam S, Broekman BF, Chen H, Wong E, Kwek K, Saw SM, Chong YS, Gluckman PD, Fortier MV, Pederson D, Meaney MJ, Qiu A.

Transl Psychiatry. 2015 Oct 27;5:e668. doi: 10.1038/tp.2015.133.

9.

Functionally distinct amygdala subregions identified using DTI and high-resolution fMRI.

Balderston NL, Schultz DH, Hopkins L, Helmstetter FJ.

Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2015 Dec;10(12):1615-22. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsv055. Epub 2015 May 11.

10.

A model of face selection in viewing video stories.

Suda Y, Kitazawa S.

Sci Rep. 2015 Jan 19;5:7666. doi: 10.1038/srep07666.

11.

Functional fractionation of the stimulus-driven attention network.

Han SW, Marois R.

J Neurosci. 2014 May 14;34(20):6958-69. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.4975-13.2014.

12.

Increased amygdala and visual cortex activity and functional connectivity towards stimulus novelty is associated with state anxiety.

Ousdal OT, Andreassen OA, Server A, Jensen J.

PLoS One. 2014 Apr 22;9(4):e96146. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0096146. eCollection 2014.

13.

Amygdala Activation and Emotional Processing in Adolescents at Risk for Substance Use Disorders.

Thatcher DL, Pajtek S, Tarter R, Long EC, Clark DB.

J Child Adolesc Subst Abuse. 2014 May 1;23(3):200-204.

14.

Structural and functional bases of inhibited temperament.

Clauss JA, Seay AL, VanDerKlok RM, Avery SN, Cao A, Cowan RL, Benningfield MM, Blackford JU.

Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2014 Dec;9(12):2049-58. doi: 10.1093/scan/nsu019. Epub 2014 Feb 3.

15.

The effect of threat on novelty evoked amygdala responses.

Balderston NL, Schultz DH, Helmstetter FJ.

PLoS One. 2013 May 3;8(5):e63220. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0063220. Print 2013.

16.

Childhood maltreatment and response to novel face stimuli presented during functional magnetic resonance imaging in adults.

Edmiston EK, Blackford JU.

Psychiatry Res. 2013 Apr 30;212(1):36-42. doi: 10.1016/j.pscychresns.2012.11.009. Epub 2013 Mar 7.

17.

Novelty enhances visual perception.

Schomaker J, Meeter M.

PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e50599. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050599. Epub 2012 Dec 5. Erratum in: PLoS One. 2013;8(7). doi10.1371/annotation/0e5cfa98-8d8d-4a0f-b489-72886a4ab407.

18.

The effect of intellectual ability on functional activation in a neurodevelopmental disorder: preliminary evidence from multiple fMRI studies in Williams syndrome.

Pryweller JR, Avery SN, Blackford JU, Dykens EM, Thornton-Wells TA.

J Neurodev Disord. 2012 Oct 26;4(1):24. doi: 10.1186/1866-1955-4-24.

19.

FKBP5 and emotional neglect interact to predict individual differences in amygdala reactivity.

White MG, Bogdan R, Fisher PM, Muñoz KE, Williamson DE, Hariri AR.

Genes Brain Behav. 2012 Oct;11(7):869-78. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-183X.2012.00837.x.

20.

Medial prefrontal cortex serotonin 1A and 2A receptor binding interacts to predict threat-related amygdala reactivity.

Fisher PM, Price JC, Meltzer CC, Moses-Kolko EL, Becker C, Berga SL, Hariri AR.

Biol Mood Anxiety Disord. 2011 Sep 27;1(1):2. doi: 10.1186/2045-5380-1-2.

Supplemental Content

Support Center