Distinct influence of parental occupation on cortical thickness and surface area in children and adolescents: Relation to self-esteem

Abstract

Studies of socioeconomic disparities have largely focused on correlating brain measures with either composite measure of socioeconomic status (SES), or its components-family income or parental education, giving little attention to the component of parental occupation. Emerging evidence suggests that parental occupation may be an important and neglected indicator of childhood and adolescent SES compared to absolute measures of material resources or academic attainment because, while related, it may more precisely capture position in social hierarchy and related health outcomes. On the other hand, although cortical thickness and surface area are brain measures with distinct genetic and developmental origins, large-scale neuroimaging studies investigating regional differences in interaction of the composite measure of SES or its components with cortical thickness and surface area are missing. We set out to fill this gap, focusing specifically on the role of parental occupation on cortical thickness and surface area by analyzing magnetic resonance imaging scans from 704 healthy individuals (age = 3-21 years). We observed spatially distributed patterns of (parental occupation × age² ) interaction with cortical thickness (localized at the left caudal middle frontal, the left inferior parietal and the right superior parietal) and surface area (localized at the left orbitofrontal cortex), indicating independent sources of variability. Further, with decreased cortical thickness, children from families with lower parental occupation exhibited lower self-esteem. Our findings demonstrate distinct influence of parental occupation on cortical thickness and surface area in children and adolescents, potentially reflecting different neurobiological mechanisms by which parental occupation may impact brain development.

Keywords: brain development; cortical thickness; parental occupation; self-esteem; socioeconomic status (SES); surface area.

FIGURE 1

Interaction of (parental occupation × age²) and brain structure. Spatially distributed patterns of (parental occupation × age²) interaction on (a) cortical thickness, (b) surface area, and (c) cortical volume with the left and right panels showing t‐statistics and p‐statistics (p < .05 after correcting for multiple comparisons using random field theory), respectively. Fitted curves of cortical thickness (a), surface area (b), and cortical volume (c) data are depicted for vertices with maximum t‐statistics (see Table 5). Note: Individuals from families with higher parental occupation exhibited greater cortical thickness/surface area/cortical volume for several periods of development when compared to individuals from families with lower parental occupation. Note: x‐Axis = age (years), y‐axis = cortical thickness/surface area/cortical volume

FIGURE 2

Interaction of (parental education × age²) and brain structure. Spatially distributed patterns of (parental education × age²) interaction on (a) cortical thickness, (b) surface area, and (c) cortical volume with the left and right panels showing t‐statistics and p‐statistics (p < .05 after correcting for multiple comparisons using random field theory), respectively. Fitted curves of cortical thickness (a), surface area (b), and cortical volume (c) data are depicted for vertices with maximum t‐statistics (see Table 6). Note: Individuals from families with higher parental education exhibited greater cortical thickness/surface area/cortical volume for several periods of development when compared to individuals from families with lower parental education. Note: x‐axis = age (years), y‐axis = cortical thickness/surface area/cortical volume

FIGURE 3

Interaction of (family income × age²) and brain structure. Spatially distributed patterns of (family income × age²) interaction on (a) cortical thickness, (b) surface area, and (c) cortical volume with the left and right panels showing t‐statistics and p‐statistics (p < .05 after correcting for multiple comparisons using random field theory), respectively. Fitted curves of cortical thickness (a), surface area (b), and cortical volume (c) data are depicted for vertices with maximum t‐statistics (see Table 7). Note: Significant interaction of family income and age² was observed for surface area but not for cortical thickness and cortical volume. Individuals from families with higher family income exhibited greater surface area for several periods of development when compared to individuals from families with family income. Note: x‐axis = age (years), y‐axis = surface area

FIGURE 4

Interaction of parental occupation, self‐esteem, and brain structure. Interaction of parental occupation and self‐esteem for (a) cortical thickness, (b) surface area, and (c) cortical volume at the identified peak vertices (see Table 5) are shown. Significant interaction of parental occupation and self‐esteem was observed with cortical thickness (at all peak vertices) and cortical volume (at one peak vertex), such that individuals from families with lower parental occupation exhibited significant positive association between self‐esteem and cortical thickness and cortical volume. Note: x‐axis = self‐esteem, y‐axis = cortical thickness/surface area/cortical volume