Intrinsic Functional Connectivity of the Anterior Cingulate Cortex Is Associated with Tolerance to Distress

Abstract

The ability to adapt under significant adversity, defined as psychological resilience, is instrumental in preventing stress-related disorders. An important aspect of resilience is the capacity to endure affective distress when in pursuit of goals, also known as distress tolerance. Evidence that links intrinsic baseline interactions within large-scale functional networks with performance under distress remains missing. We hypothesized that the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) may engage in distress tolerance because of its involvement in attention and emotion regulation. Accordingly, we tested whether behavioral performance under distress is associated with baseline resting-state ACC functional connectivity (FC). Distress tolerance was measured in 97 participants using the behavioral indicator of resiliency to distress (BIRD) task. Analyses contrasted participants who quit the task before its designated termination (n = 51) with those who persisted throughout it (n = 46). Seed-based FC analysis indicated greater connectivity between the ACC and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) in subjects who persisted throughout the task, along with greater FC between the ACC and the precentral gyrus in those who quit before its termination. The results shed light on the mechanisms underlying interindividual differences in the ability to handle distress.

Keywords: ACC; distress tolerance; functional connectivity; functional networks; resilience.

Figure 1.

The BIRD task. A, Schematic illustration of a BIRD trial. Participants were presented with a series of numbers arranged in a circle. In each trial, participants were instructed to move the cursor to the number covered by the green dot before the dot moved away and the trial ended. Latency was measured based on trial duration. B, Latency was adjusted to performance at the first stage of the task and was held constant until 1 min before the end of the second stage, when it was reduced by half. Latency at the third stage of the task was the same as that used during the end of stage 2, but participants were given the option to quit at any time.

Figure 2.

Group differences in ACC FC among subjects who quit and persisted in the BIRD task. A, participants’ classification into two groups: persistent group and quit group. B, Distribution of persistence (quit time) as seen in the quit group. C, Resting state FC between the ACC and the rest of the brain across all participants (n = 97). D, Clusters of significant voxels where FC with the ACC was higher in the quit group, relative to the persistent group (quit > persistent). E, Clusters of voxels where FC with the ACC was higher in the persistent group, relative to the quit group (persistent > quit).

Figure 3.

Analysis of control seed ROIs. A, Centroid coordinates of the mPFC and the bilateral paracingulate cortex control seed ROIs. B, Group comparisons in all control seed ROIs yielded no suprathreshold clusters in neither of the contrasts reported in Figure 2 (persistent > quit, or quit > persistent).