The goal priority network as a neural substrate of Conscientiousness

Abstract

Conscientiousness is a personality trait associated with many important life outcomes, but little is known about the mechanisms that underlie it. We investigated its neural correlates using functional connectivity analysis in fMRI, which identifies brain regions that act in synchrony. We tested the hypothesis that a broad network resembling a combination of the salience and ventral attention networks, which we provisionally label the goal priority network (GPN), is a neural correlate of Conscientiousness. Self- and peer-ratings of Conscientiousness were collected in a community sample of adults who underwent a resting-state fMRI scan (N = 218). An independent components analysis yielded five components that overlapped substantially with the GPN. We examined synchrony within and between these GPN subcomponents. Synchrony within one of the components-mainly comprising regions of anterior insula, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex-was significantly associated with Conscientiousness. Connectivity between this component and the four other GPN components was also significantly associated with Conscientiousness. Our results support the hypothesis that variation in a network that enables prioritization of multiple goals may be central to Conscientiousness.

Keywords: Conscientiousness; functional connectivity; goal priority network; resting state fMRI; rs-fcMRI; salience network; ventral attention network.

Figure 1

Intrinsic connectivity networks (ICNs) associated with the goal priority network (GPN); ICN‐1 = yellow, ICN‐2 = purple, ICN‐3 = dark blue, ICN‐4 = cyan, ICN‐5 = green (MNI coordinates x, y, z = 8, 22, 20) [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Figure 2

(a) GPN ICNs (yellow) compared to Yeo et al.'s (2011) VAN (red; MNI Coordinates x, y, z = 8, 4, 30); (b) FPCN ICNs (orange) compared to Yeo et al.'s (2011) FPCN (blue; MNI coordinates x, y, z = 34, 34, 20); (c) DN ICNs (purple) compared to Yeo et al.'s (2011) DN (green; MNI coordinates x, y, z = 1, 38, 0). VAN = ventral attention network; FPCN = frontoparietal control network; DN = default network [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Figure 3

Partial correlations between the Big Five and ICN coherence in the goal priority network, controlling for age, sex, IQ, motion, and components in the FPCN and DN. N = 218. *p < .05, **p < .01. FPCN = frontoparietal control network; DN = default network; ICN = intrinsic connectivity network [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]

Figure 4

(a) Relation between Conscientiousness and ICN‐1 coherence (residualized). Higher coherence scores reflect a more synchronous network. (b) Relation between Conscientiousness and ICN‐1 connectivity to other GPN ICNs (residualized). Higher scores of connectivity reflect more synchrony between ICN‐1 and the rest of the GPN

Figure 5

Inflated brain map comparing our ICN‐1 (yellow) to networks identified by Yeo et al. (2011). (a) Broad ventral attention network (VAN) from their 7‐network parcellation (red, overlap indicated in orange). (b) Network most closely approximating our ICN‐1, from their 17‐network parcellation (blue, overlap indicated in green) [Color figure can be viewed at http://wileyonlinelibrary.com]