@article{BoeckerSchlierHolzBuchmannetal.2016,
  author    = {Boecker-Schlier, Regina and Holz, Nathalie E. and Buchmann, Arlette F. and Blomeyer, Dorothea and Plichta, Michael M. and Jennen-Steinmetz, Christine and Wolf, Isabella and Baumeister, Sarah and Treutleind, Jens and Rietschel, Marcella and Meyer-Lindenberg, Andreas and Banaschewski, Tobias and Brandeis, Daniel and Laucht, Manfred},
  title     = {Interaction between COMT Val(158)Met polymorphism and childhood adversity affects reward processing in adulthood},
  series = {NeuroImage : a journal of brain function},
  volume    = {132},
  journal   = {NeuroImage : a journal of brain function},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {San Diego},
  issn      = {1053-8119},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.neuroimage.2016.02.006},
  pages     = {556 -- 570},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Background: Accumulating evidence suggests that altered dopamine transmission may increase the risk of mental disorders such as ADHD, schizophrenia or depression, possibly mediated by reward system dysfunction. This study aimed to clarify the impact of the COMT Val(158)Met polymorphism in interaction with environmental variation (G x E) on neuronal activity during reward processing. Methods: 168 healthy young adults from a prospective study conducted over 25 years participated in amonetary incentive delay task measured with simultaneous EEG-fMRI. DNA was genotyped for COMT, and childhood family adversity (CFA) up to age 11 was assessed by a standardized parent interview. Results: At reward delivery, a G x E revealed that fMRI activation for win vs. no-win trials in reward-related regions increased with the level of CFA in Met homozygotes as compared to Val/Met heterozygotes and Val homozygotes, who showed no significant effect. During the anticipation of monetary vs. verbal rewards, activation decreased with the level of CFA, which was also observed for EEG, in which the CNV declined with the level of CFA. Conclusions: These results identify convergent genetic and environmental effects on reward processing in a prospective study. Moreover, G x E effects during reward delivery suggest that stress during childhood is associated with higher reward sensitivity and reduced efficiency in processing rewarding stimuli in genetically at-risk individuals. Together with previous evidence, these results begin to define a specific system mediating interacting effects of early environmental and genetic risk factors, which may be targeted by early intervention and prevention. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{MalyutinaDragoyIvanovaetal.2016,
  author    = {Malyutina, Svetlana and Dragoy, Olga V. and Ivanova, Maria and Laurinavichyute, Anna and Petrushevsky, Alexey and Meindl, Thomas and P{\"o}ppel, Ernst and Gutyrchik, Evgeny},
  title     = {Fishing is not wrestling: Neural underpinnings of the verb instrumentality effect},
  series = {Journal of neurolinguistics : an international journal for the study of brain function in language behavior and experience},
  volume    = {40},
  journal   = {Journal of neurolinguistics : an international journal for the study of brain function in language behavior and experience},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  address   = {Oxford},
  issn      = {0911-6044},
  doi       = {10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.03.002},
  pages     = {37 -- 54},
  year      = {2016},
  abstract  = {Previous clinical research has shown a positive effect of instrumentality on verb retrieval in individuals with aphasia. Performance on instrumental verbs incorporating an obligatory tool into their conceptual representation (e.g., to cut) is more accurate compared to non instrumental verbs (e.g., to tear), possibly due to more specific conceptual representations of instrumental verbs. Seeking the neural correlates of the differences between instrumental and non-instrumental verbs, we conducted an fMRI study with 16 German speakers who performed a verb-object matching task with instrumental and non instrumental verbs. We found that an extensive neural network. including but not limited to frontal and temporal language-related areas was more involved in the semantic processing of non-instrumental compared to instrumental verbs. We argue that this reflects a greater load associated with the processing of less semantically structured/restricted representations of non-instrumental verbs. The unavailability of additional neural resources needed for the processing of non-instrumental verbs in individuals with aphasia may lead to better behavioral performance on instrumental than non instrumental verbs. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.},
  language  = {en}
}