Science Publications

Sign Up
Sign In
Submit
Journal of Cellular Neuroscience
Cite This Article Share Download PDF XML
  1. Home
  2. Journals
  3. Journal of Cellular Neuroscience
  4. Archive
  5. Volume 2, Issue 1, 2025
  6. Article
Article Open Access February 25, 2025

Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development

Shervin Assari 1, 2, 3, 4,*, Alexandra Donovan 1, Golnoush Akhlaghipour 4, Mario F Mendez 5, 6 and Shervin Assari 1, 2, 3, 4
1
Department of Internal Medicine, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA, United States
2
Department of Family Medicine, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA, United States
3
Department of Urban Public Health, Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA, United States
4
Marginalization-Related Diminished Returns (MDRs) Center, Los Angeles, CA, United States
5
Department of Neurology, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA
6
Department of Psychiatry & Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, CA, USA
Publihed in: Journal of Cellular Neuroscience (Volume 2, Issue 1, 2025)
Page(s): 1-11
DOI: 10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
Received
October 11, 2024
Revised
December 23, 2024
Accepted
February 10, 2025
Published
February 25, 2025
Keywords
Cingulo-Opercular Network; Default Mode Network; Cognition; Educational Opportunities; Family Structure; Resting-State Functional Connectivity; Social Determinants of Health
Creative Commons

This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.
Copyright: Copyright © The Author(s), 2025. Published by Scientific Publications

Abstract

Background: The Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) is a crucial executive control network involved in regulating actions and facilitating higher-order cognitive processes. Resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and the Default Mode Network (DMN) plays a vital role in cognitive regulation, enabling the transition between internally focused and externally directed tasks. This study investigates whether resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and DMN mediates the effects of social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, on cognitive outcomes in youth. Aims: This study aims to explore how CON-DMN connectivity influences the relationship between social gradients and cognition in youth. Specifically, it examines whether resting-state functional connectivity between these networks mediates the effects of educational opportunities and family structure on cognitive outcomes and seeks to uncover the neural mechanisms underlying these social gradients. Methods: Data were derived from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, a large longitudinal dataset of over 11,000 children aged 9–10 years. Cognitive outcomes were assessed using standardized NIH toolbox measures: Total Composite, Fluid Reasoning, Picture Vocabulary, Pattern Recognition, and Card Sorting. Social determinants were operationalized using indicators such as parental education, family composition, and neighborhood educational opportunities (COI). Resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) between the CON and DMN was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to test whether CON-DMN rsFC mediated the relationship between social determinants and cognitive outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders such as age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Results: Stable family structure and greater educational opportunities were significantly associated with improved cognitive performance. These relationships were mediated by reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN. Conclusion: Reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN serves as a neural mechanism linking social gradients, such as educational opportunities and family structure, to better cognitive outcomes in youth.

1. Introduction

Cognitive development during childhood is profoundly influenced by social determinants [1, 2, 3, 4]. Children from high socioeconomic status (SES) backgrounds are more likely to attend well-resourced schools, providing them with enriched learning environments [5, 6, 7]. Conversely, children raised in poverty often receive less cognitive stimulation, which hinders their developmental trajectories [8, 9, 10].

Neural pathways, including specific brain regions, structures, networks, and the functional connectivity between them, predict cognitive function [11, 12, 13]. Among the essential networks involved in cognitive processes is the Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) [14, 15, 16], which plays a pivotal role in executive control and goal-directed behaviors. The CON regulates actions through top-down control mechanisms, facilitating higher-order cognitive functions such as attention, error detection, and task maintenance. Similarly, the Default Mode Network (DMN) is crucial for cognitive processes, primarily active during rest and self-referential thought, and deactivating during externally focused, task-oriented activities. Functional connectivity between these networks—the CON and DMN—has emerged as a key neural substrate for cognitive regulation, enabling smooth transitions between introspective and goal-directed states [16, 17, 18, 19].

Social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, also significantly shape the neural pathways that underlie cognitive outcomes during formative years [20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25]. Educational opportunities, often represented by parental education and neighborhood socioeconomic status (SES), provide cognitive stimulation and an enriched environment that supports brain maturation and cognitive growth [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]. Family structure, including marital status and household composition, contributes to stability and emotional support, further shaping developmental trajectories. However, disparities in these social determinants contribute to social gradients in cognition, where children from less advantaged backgrounds consistently exhibit poorer cognitive outcomes compared to their more privileged peers.

While the influence of social determinants on cognitive and brain development is well-established [30, 32, 33, 34, 35], there is a need to identify the neural mechanisms that mediate these relationships. Recent advancements in neuroimaging, particularly resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC), provide a robust framework for examining how social factors influence neural network connectivity and, consequently, cognitive performance. rsFC between the CON and DMN is known to support cognitive flexibility and executive function [18, 36, 37], and is shaped by social factors such as SES [38]. These attributes are critical for academic success and adaptive behaviors, suggesting that CON-DMN connectivity may serve as a mediating mechanism through which social opportunities and stability influence cognitive function.

This study utilizes data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study [39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44], a large longitudinal cohort of children aged 9–10 years, to explore whether functional connectivity between the CON and DMN mediates the relationship between social determinants—specifically educational opportunities and family structure—and cognitive outcomes. By integrating measures of social context, neural connectivity, and cognitive performance, this research aims to clarify the pathways through which social gradients in cognition are established and perpetuated. Understanding these mechanisms is essential for designing interventions to address disparities in cognitive development and promote equity in educational and developmental outcomes.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design and Participants

This study utilized data from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study, a longitudinal, multisite cohort study designed to explore factors influencing brain development and health in youth across the United States. We analyzed baseline data collected from a diverse sample of nearly 12,000 children aged 9-10 years, focusing on demographic, social, and neuroimaging variables. The study population included children from a range of racial/ethnic backgrounds and socioeconomic contexts.

2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Demographic and Social Variables

Key demographic variables included age (in years), sex (male vs. female), and race/ethnicity (categorized as Black, Latino, Asian, Other, with White as the reference group). Socioeconomic indicators comprised parental years of education, household marital structure (married vs. not married), and the Child Opportunity Index (COI) Educational Subscale (national level), which reflects regional educational opportunities.

2.2.2. Resting-State Functional Connectivity (rsFC)

rsFC between the Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) and Default Mode Network (DMN) were drawn from ABCD data set. The ABCD team have calculated the rsFC using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Standard preprocessing pipelines, including motion correction, spatial normalization, and filtering, were applied to derive connectivity metrics. CON-DMN rsFC was quantified as the Fisher’s z-transformed correlation between mean time series of the two networks.

2.3. Harmonization

The MRI procedures used in the ABCD Study are thoroughly explained in detail in other publications [39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44]. The ABCD Imaging Acquisition Workgroup (https://abcdstudy.org/scientists-workgroups.html) developed, refined, and standardized the imaging measures and protocols across all 21 ABCD sites. This referenced work outlines the foundation and methodology of the ABCD imaging protocols and provides an initial assessment of their quality, demonstrating their suitability for children aged 9 to 10 years [45].

2.3.1. Cognitive Outcomes

Cognitive performance was measured using the following measures from the NIH cognitive toolbox [46, 47, 48]: Reading, Total Composite, Fluid Reasoning, Picture Vocabulary, Pattern Recognition, and Card Sorting. These tasks capture a range of cognitive domains relevant to academic and everyday functioning. For this analysis, we used a latent factor for cognitive function.

2.4. Statistical Analysis

Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to examine the relationships between demographic and social variables, rsFC, and cognitive outcomes. Two models were developed: one predicting rsFC from demographic and social variables, and the other predicting cognitive outcomes from rsFC and social factors. Model coefficients (B), standard errors (SE), and p-values were reported for all paths. Age and sex were included as covariates in all models. The SEM allowed both direct effects from socioeconomic indicators to cognitive function as well as indirect effects from socioeconomic indicators to cognitive functions via rsFC between DMN and CON. Model fit was assessed using the Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) [49]. A CFI and TLI above 0.90 and an RMSEA below 0.08 indicated acceptable model fit. Missing data were handled using full information maximum likelihood estimation. All analyses were conducted using Stata 18.0.

2.5. Ethical Considerations

The ABCD Study protocol was approved by the institutional review board of the UCSD. Informed consent and assent were obtained from parents and children, respectively. Data were analyzed anonymously.

3. Results

As shown in Table 1 and Figure 1, our structural equation modeling (SEM) revealed significant relationships between demographic and social variables, resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) between the Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) and the Default Mode Network (DMN), and cognitive outcomes. These findings are detailed below:

3.1. Associations with rsFC

Living in a married household was associated with reduced rsFC (B = -0.024, SE = 0.011, p = 0.034). Educational opportunities (COI Educational National) were negatively associated with rsFC, indicating that children from regions with higher educational opportunities had lower CON-DMN connectivity (B = -0.033, SE = 0.012, p = 0.007). Parental education years showed no significant association with rsFC (B = 0.010, SE = 0.012, p = 0.403). Race/ethnicity influenced rsFC. Black children had significantly higher rsFC compared to the reference group (B = 0.031, SE = 0.012, p = 0.009). Latino, Asian, and Other racial/ethnic groups did not show significant differences from the reference group. Age was negatively associated with rsFC, indicating that older children demonstrated lower connectivity between the CON and DMN (B = -0.067, SE = 0.010, p < 0.001). Male sex was positively associated with rsFC, with boys showing higher functional connectivity (B = 0.123, SE = 0.010, p < 0.001).

3.2. Associations with Cognition

rsFC was negatively associated with cognition, with lower CON-DMN connectivity predicting better cognitive performance (B = -0.035, SE = 0.009, p < 0.001). Living in a married household and educational opportunities were positively associated with cognitive outcomes (Married household: B = 0.078, SE = 0.009, p < 0.001; Educational opportunities: B = 0.081, SE = 0.011, p < 0.001). Race/ethnicity effects varied. Black children had significantly lower cognitive outcomes compared to the reference group (B = -0.139, SE = 0.010, p < 0.001), while Asian children showed a small positive association (B = 0.038, SE = 0.008, p < 0.001). Latino and Other racial/ethnic groups showed no significant differences. Age and parental education years were strong positive predictors of cognitive outcomes (Age: B = 0.295, SE = 0.005, p < 0.001; Parental education: B = 0.299, SE = 0.010, p < 0.001). Male sex was negatively associated with cognition (B = -0.035, SE = 0.008, p < 0.001).

3.3. Cognitive Outcomes by Task

The latent factor of Cognition demonstrated strong loading of items of cognitive ability using these task-specific measures: Reading (B = 0.797, SE = 0.003, p < 0.001), Total Composite (B = 0.823, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001), Fluid reasoning (B = 0.817, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001), Picture Vocabulary (B = 0.692, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001), Pattern Recognition (B = 0.573, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001), and Card Sorting (B = 0.746, SE = 0.004, p < 0.001).

These findings suggest that lower rsFC between the CON and DMN is associated with better cognitive performance, potentially serving as a mediating mechanism for the effects of social determinants on cognitive outcomes. Social factors, such as parental education, household structure, and educational opportunities, exert significant direct and indirect influences on cognitive development. Differences by race/ethnicity highlight the role of structural inequities in shaping both neural connectivity and cognitive outcomes.

Table 1
Summary of Structural Equation Model (SEM)
Figure 1
Summary of Structural Equation Model (SEM); Note: Cognitive Function Observed Variables Include 1) Reading, 2) Total Composite, 3) Fluid, 4) Picture, 5) Pattern, and 6) Card Sortl Educ: Parental Education; Married: Parents Married; COI: Childhood Opportunity Index

4. Discussion

This study investigated whether CON-DMN rsFC mediates the effects of social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, on cognitive outcomes in youth. Our findings demonstrated that higher educational opportunities and stable family structures were positively associated with better cognitive performance, mediated in part by lower CON-DMN rsFC. These results suggest that social determinants shape neural connectivity patterns, which in turn influence cognitive development during critical formative years.

Our findings align with previous research highlighting the role of social determinants in cognitive outcomes [27, 28, 2950, 51]. Educational opportunities, reflected by parental education and neighborhood socioeconomic status, have consistently been associated with better cognitive performance, likely due to enriched environments and greater cognitive stimulation. Similarly, stable family structures provide emotional and logistical support that foster academic success and cognitive growth.

Our findings on the mediating role of neural connectivity, particularly CON-DMN rsFC, add a novel dimension to this literature. Prior studies have established that the CON [14, 15, 17, 52, 53, 54, 55] supports various aspects of cognitive function as measured by executive control and goal-directed behavior, while the DMN [56, 57, 58] is involved in introspection and self-referential thought. Reduced functional connectivity between these networks is critical for cognitive flexibility and regulation. Consistent with these findings, our results suggest that reduced CON-DMN connectivity supports efficient transitions between introspective and task-focused states, facilitating improved cognitive outcomes in children exposed to positive social determinants.

At least some studies have shown that rsFC can provide a robust framework for examining how social factors influence neural network connectivity and, consequently, cognitive performance. For instance, rsFC between the CON-DMN rsFC has been linked to enhanced cognitive flexibility and executive function in adults [18, 36, 37]. However, our findings revealed an inverse relationship between cognitive function and CON-DMN rsFC, a result that is not entirely clear and warrants further investigation. One possibility is that the developmental stage may moderate this relationship—while CON-DMN connectivity might support cognitive performance in adults, it could have a different, perhaps even detrimental, impact during earlier developmental periods such as childhood or adolescence. This suggests a complex interplay between neural network maturation and cognitive outcomes, emphasizing the need for additional longitudinal research to better understand these dynamics.

Parental education years showed no significant association with rsFC (B = 0.010, SE = 0.012, p = 0.403). This was a surprising finding given that parental education is often considered a strong indicator of socioeconomic status and is typically linked to positive developmental outcomes. One potential explanation for the null result is that our analysis adjusted for neighborhood educational opportunities, which may capture much of the variability usually associated with parental education. In other words, the local educational environment might play a more critical role in shaping neural connectivity than previously thought, potentially mediating or even overshadowing the effects of individual parental education levels. This finding highlights the importance of considering both individual and community-level factors when examining neurodevelopmental outcomes.

4.1. Mechanisms Underlying Observed Relationships

The relationship between social determinants and cognitive outcomes can be partially explained by their influence on neural development [26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31]. Children from families with higher parental education or stable household structures are more likely to experience enriched environments that promote optimal brain development [20, 21, 22]. These environmental conditions enhance the development of large-scale neural networks, such as the CON and DMN, reducing excessive connectivity between these networks and improving their functional specialization. Lower CON-DMN rsFC may reflect more efficient neural communication, enabling better regulation of attention and cognitive resources required for academic achievement.

Conversely, children raised in less advantageous social environments may experience chronic stress, fewer cognitive stimuli, and less access to resources, which can disrupt the development and specialization of neural networks. Elevated CON-DMN rsFC in these children may reflect overconnectivity or reduced functional segregation, leading to less efficient cognitive processing and poorer outcomes.

4.2. Implications

These findings have implications for understanding socioeconomic disparities in cognitive development. First, they emphasize the importance of improving educational opportunities and supporting family stability as strategies for promoting optimal brain and cognitive development in children. Policies aimed at reducing socioeconomic inequalities, such as access to quality education, parental support programs, and neighborhood investment, may help mitigate the effects of adverse social determinants on neural and cognitive outcomes.

Second, this study highlights the potential of neural biomarkers, such as CON-DMN rsFC, in identifying children at risk for cognitive difficulties due to social disadvantages. Interventions targeting neural connectivity, such as mindfulness-based practices, cognitive training, or neurofeedback, may offer innovative approaches to enhancing cognitive flexibility and executive function, particularly in children from underserved populations.

4.3. Limitations

This study has several limitations. First, its cross-sectional design precludes causal inferences regarding the relationships between social determinants, neural connectivity, and cognitive outcomes. Longitudinal data from the ABCD study are needed to establish temporal precedence and causal pathways. Second, while resting-state functional connectivity provides valuable insights, task-based fMRI and structural connectivity measures could offer a more comprehensive understanding of neural mechanisms underlying cognitive regulation. Finally, although the sample was diverse, further research should explore these associations across specific subgroups to identify unique patterns of vulnerability and resilience.

5. Conclusion

This study demonstrates that functional connectivity between the CON and DMN partially mediates the effects of social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, on cognitive outcomes in youth. These findings underscore the importance of addressing social inequalities to promote neural and cognitive development and highlight the potential for targeting neural connectivity in interventions aimed at reducing disparities in cognitive outcomes. Future research should build on these findings by employing longitudinal designs and exploring targeted interventions to enhance neural and cognitive resilience in children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Authors contribution:

SA: Concept, design, analysis, first draft, approval of the final version. AD, MFM, GA: review, revision, approval of the final version.

Authors’ Funding:

Shervin Assari is supported by funds provided by The Regents of the University of California, Tobacco-Related Diseases Research Program, Grant Number no T32IR5355. Alexandra Donovan is supported by funds from the National Institutes of Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse Substance Abuse Research Training (SART) program (1R25DA050723) and National Institute on Minority Health and Health Disparities grant to the Urban Health Institute (S21 MD000103). No funders had any role in the design of the current manuscript or in the analyses or interpretation of the data.

ABCD Funding:

Data used in the preparation of this article were obtained from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study (https://abcdstudy.org), held in the NIMH Data Archive (NDA). This is a multisite, longitudinal study designed to recruit more than 10,000 children age 9-10 and follow them over 10 years into early adulthood. The opinions, findings, and conclusions herein are those of the authors and not necessarily represent The Regents of the University of California, or any of its programs. The ABCD Study® is supported by the National Institutes of Health and additional federal partners under award numbers U01DA041048, U01DA050989, U01DA051016, U01DA041022, U01DA051018, U01DA051037, U01DA050987, U01DA041174, U01DA041106, U01DA041117, U01DA041028, U01DA041134, U01DA050988, U01DA051039, U01DA041156, U01DA041025, U01DA041120, U01DA051038, U01DA041148, U01DA041093, U01DA041089, U24DA041123, U24DA041147. A full list of supporters is available at https://abcdstudy.org/federal-partners.html. A listing of participating sites and a complete listing of the study investigators can be found at https://abcdstudy.org/consortium_members/. ABCD consortium investigators designed and implemented the study and/or provided data but did not necessarily participate in the analysis or writing of this report. This manuscript reflects the views of the authors and may not reflect the opinions or views of the NIH or ABCD consortium investigators.

References

  1. Aartsen MJ, Cheval B, Sieber S, et al. Advantaged socioeconomic conditions in childhood are associated with higher cognitive functioning but stronger cognitive decline in older age. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Mar 19 2019;116(12):5478-5486. doi:10.1073/pnas.1807679116[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Assari S, Boyce S, Mistry R, et al. Parents' Perceived Neighborhood Safety and Children's Cognitive Performance: Complexities by Race, Ethnicity, and Cognitive Domain. Urban Sci. Jun 2021;5(2)doi:10.3390/urbansci5020046[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Beauregard JL, Drews-Botsch C, Sales JM, Flanders WD, Kramer MR. Does Socioeconomic Status Modify the Association Between Preterm Birth and Children's Early Cognitive Ability and Kindergarten Academic Achievement in the United States? Am J Epidemiol. Aug 1 2018;187(8):1704-1713. doi:10.1093/aje/kwy068[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Bennett KK, Buchanan DM, Jones PG, Spertus JA. Socioeconomic status, cognitive-emotional factors, and health status following myocardial infarction: testing the Reserve Capacity Model. J Behav Med. Feb 2015;38(1):110-21. doi:10.1007/s10865-014-9583-4[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Alves AF, Martins A, Almeida LS. Interactions between Sex, Socioeconomic Level, and Children's Cognitive Performance. Psychol Rep. Apr 2016;118(2):471-86. doi:10.1177/0033294116639428[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Amso D, Salhi C, Badre D. The relationship between cognitive enrichment and cognitive control: A systematic investigation of environmental influences on development through socioeconomic status. Dev Psychobiol. Mar 2019;61(2):159-178. doi:10.1002/dev.21794[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Figlio DN, Freese J, Karbownik K, Roth J. Socioeconomic status and genetic influences on cognitive development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Dec 19 2017;114(51):13441-13446. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708491114[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Farah MJ, Shera DM, Savage JH, et al. Childhood poverty: specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Res. Sep 19 2006;1110(1):166-74. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.06.072[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Kaplan GA, Turrell G, Lynch JW, Everson SA, Helkala EL, Salonen JT. Childhood socioeconomic position and cognitive function in adulthood. Int J Epidemiol. Apr 2001;30(2):256-63. doi:10.1093/ije/30.2.256[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Lang IA, Llewellyn DJ, Langa KM, Wallace RB, Huppert FA, Melzer D. Neighborhood deprivation, individual socioeconomic status, and cognitive function in older people: analyses from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. J Am Geriatr Soc. Feb 2008;56(2):191-8. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01557.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Song M, Zhou Y, Li J, et al. Brain spontaneous functional connectivity and intelligence. Neuroimage. 2008;41(3):1168-1176.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Plitt M, Barnes KA, Wallace GL, Kenworthy L, Martin A. Resting-state functional connectivity predicts longitudinal change in autistic traits and adaptive functioning in autism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(48):E6699-E6706.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sripada C, Angstadt M, Taxali A, et al. Brain-wide functional connectivity patterns support general cognitive ability and mediate effects of socioeconomic status in youth. Translational psychiatry. 2021;11(1):571.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wallis G, Stokes M, Cousijn H, Woolrich M, Nobre AC. Frontoparietal and cingulo-opercular networks play dissociable roles in control of working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2015;27(10):2019-2034.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Sheffield JM, Repovs G, Harms MP, et al. Fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular network integrity and cognition in health and schizophrenia. Neuropsychologia. 2015;73:82-93.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Coste CP, Kleinschmidt A. Cingulo-opercular network activity maintains alertness. Neuroimage. 2016;128:264-272.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Tomiyama H, Murayama K, Nemoto K, et al. Alterations of default mode and cingulo-opercular salience network and frontostriatal circuit: a candidate endophenotype of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry. 2022;116:110516.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Sheffield JM, Kandala S, Burgess GC, Harms MP, Barch DM. Cingulo-opercular network efficiency mediates the association between psychotic-like experiences and cognitive ability in the general population. Biological psychiatry: cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging. 2016;1(6):498-506.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Yang H, Zhao X, Wang T, et al. Hypoconnectivity within the cingulo‐opercular network in patients with mild cognitive impairment in Chinese communities. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 2023;38(8):e5979.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Noble KG, Engelhardt LE, Brito NH, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in neurocognitive development in the first two years of life. Developmental psychobiology. 2015;57(5):535-551.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Noble KG, Farah MJ. Neurocognitive consequences of socioeconomic disparities: the intersection of cognitive neuroscience and public health. Dev Sci. Sep 2013;16(5):639-40. doi:10.1111/desc.12076[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Noble KG, Giebler MA. The Neuroscience of Socioeconomic Inequality. Curr Opin Behav Sci. Dec 2020;36:23-28. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.007[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Noble KG, McCandliss BD, Farah MJ. Socioeconomic gradients predict individual differences in neurocognitive abilities. Dev Sci. Jul 2007;10(4):464-80. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00600.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Noble KG, Norman MF, Farah MJ. Neurocognitive correlates of socioeconomic status in kindergarten children. Developmental science. 2005;8(1):74-87.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Ursache A, Noble KG, Blair C. Socioeconomic Status, Subjective Social Status, and Perceived Stress: Associations with Stress Physiology and Executive Functioning. Behav Med. 2015;41(3):145-54. doi:10.1080/08964289.2015.1024604[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Brito NH, Fifer WP, Myers MM, Elliott AJ, Noble KG. Associations among family socioeconomic status, EEG power at birth, and cognitive skills during infancy. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Jun 2016;19:144-51. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2016.03.004[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Brito NH, Noble KG. Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2014;8:276.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Brito NH, Piccolo LR, Noble KG, Pediatric Imaging N, Genetics S. Associations between cortical thickness and neurocognitive skills during childhood vary by family socioeconomic factors. Brain Cogn. Aug 2017;116:54-62. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2017.03.007[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Merz EC, Maskus EA, Melvin SA, He X, Noble KG. Socioeconomic Disparities in Language Input Are Associated With Children's Language-Related Brain Structure and Reading Skills. Child Dev. May 2020;91(3):846-860. doi:10.1111/cdev.13239[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Noble KG. Rich man, poor man: socioeconomic adversity and brain development. Cerebrum. May-Jun 2014;2014:6.
  31. Noble KG, Engelhardt LE, Brito NH, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in neurocognitive development in the first two years of life. Dev Psychobiol. Jul 2015;57(5):535-51. doi:10.1002/dev.21303[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Brito NH, Noble KG. Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Front Neurosci. 2014;8:276. doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00276[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Noble KG, Houston SM, Brito NH, et al. Family income, parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents. Nature neuroscience. May 2015;18(5):773. doi:10.1038/nn.3983[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Noble KG, Houston SM, Kan E, Sowell ER. Neural correlates of socioeconomic status in the developing human brain. Dev Sci. Jul 2012;15(4):516-27. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01147.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Troller-Renfree SV, Costanzo MA, Duncan GJ, et al. The impact of a poverty reduction intervention on infant brain activity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2022;119(5):e2115649119.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Barber AD, Jacobson LA, Wexler JL, et al. Connectivity supporting attention in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Neuroimage: clinical. 2015;7:68-81.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Shen X, Cox SR, Adams MJ, et al. Resting-state connectivity and its association with cognitive performance, educational attainment, and household income in the UK Biobank. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging. 2018;3(10):878-886.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Yang Y, Kong T, Ji F, Liu R, Luo L. Associations among environmental unpredictability, changes in resting-state functional connectivity, and adolescent psychopathology in the ABCD study. Psychol Med. Nov 18 2024:1-10. doi:10.1017/s0033291724001855[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. ABCD. ABCD Protocl Brocure - Baseline.
  40. Auchter AM, Mejia MH, Heyser CJ, et al. A description of the ABCD organizational structure and communication framework. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:8-15.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Bjork JM, Straub LK, Provost RG, Neale MC. The ABCD study of neurodevelopment: Identifying neurocircuit targets for prevention and treatment of adolescent substance abuse. Current treatment options in psychiatry. 2017;4:196-209.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Casey B, Cannonier T, Conley MI, et al. The adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study: imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:43-54.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Garavan H, Bartsch H, Conway K, et al. Recruiting the ABCD sample: Design considerations and procedures. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Aug 2018;32:16-22. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.04.004[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Gray JC, Schvey NA, Tanofsky-Kraff M. Demographic, psychological, behavioral, and cognitive correlates of BMI in youth: Findings from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. Psychol Med. Jul 10 2019;50(9):1-9. doi:10.1017/S0033291719001545[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Casey BJ, Cannonier T, Conley MI, et al. The adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study: imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:43-54.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Zelazo PD, Bauer PJ. National Institutes of Health Toolbox cognition battery (NIH Toolbox CB): Validation for children between 3 and 15 years. Wiley Hoboken, NJ; 2013.
  47. Weintraub S, Dikmen SS, Heaton RK, et al. Cognition assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology. 2013;80(11_supplement_3):S54-S64.
  48. Weintraub S, Bauer PJ, Zelazo PD, et al. I. NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (CB): introduction and pediatric data. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 2013;78(4):1-15.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ryu E. Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models. Front Psychol. 2014;5:81. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Brito NH, Troller-Renfree SV, Leon-Santos A, Isler JR, Fifer WP, Noble KG. Associations among the home language environment and neural activity during infancy. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Jun 2020;43:100780. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100780[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. McCandliss BD, Noble KG. The development of reading impairment: a cognitive neuroscience model. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9(3):196-204. doi:10.1002/mrdd.10080[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Vaden KI, Jr., Eckert MA, Dubno JR, Harris KC. Cingulo-opercular adaptive control for younger and older adults during a challenging gap detection task. J Neurosci Res. Apr 2020;98(4):680-691. doi:10.1002/jnr.24506[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Vaden KI, Jr., Kuchinsky SE, Cute SL, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. The cingulo-opercular network provides word-recognition benefit. J Neurosci. Nov 27 2013;33(48):18979-86. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1417-13.2013[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Vaden KI, Jr., Teubner-Rhodes S, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. Cingulo-opercular activity affects incidental memory encoding for speech in noise. Neuroimage. Aug 15 2017;157:381-387. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.028[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Wu X, Lin P, Yang J, Song H, Yang R, Yang J. Dysfunction of the cingulo-opercular network in first-episode medication-naive patients with major depressive disorder. J Affect Disord. Aug 2016;200:275-83. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2016.04.046[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Hu M-L, Zong X-F, Mann JJ, et al. A review of the functional and anatomical default mode network in schizophrenia. Neuroscience bulletin. 2017;33:73-84.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Li J, Curley WH, Guerin B, et al. Mapping the subcortical connectivity of the human default mode network. Neuroimage. 2021;245:118758.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Mak LE, Minuzzi L, MacQueen G, Hall G, Kennedy SH, Milev R. The default mode network in healthy individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain connectivity. 2017;7(1):25-33.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
Article metrics
Views
567
Downloads
55

Cite This Article

APA Style
Assari, S. , Assari, S. Donovan, A. , Donovan, A. Akhlaghipour, G. , & Akhlaghipour, G. (2025). Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development. Journal of Cellular Neuroscience, 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
ACS Style
Assari, S. ; Assari, S. Donovan, A. ; Donovan, A. Akhlaghipour, G. ; Akhlaghipour, G. Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development. Journal of Cellular Neuroscience 2025 2(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
Chicago/Turabian Style
Assari, Shervin, Shervin Assari. Alexandra Donovan, Alexandra Donovan. Golnoush Akhlaghipour, and Golnoush Akhlaghipour. 2025. "Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development". Journal of Cellular Neuroscience 2, no. 1: 1-11. https://doi.org/10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
AMA Style
Assari S, Assari SDonovan A, Donovan AAkhlaghipour G, Akhlaghipour G. Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development. Journal of Cellular Neuroscience. 2025; 2(1):1-11. https://doi.org/10.31586/jcn.2025.1241 
@Article{jcn1241,
AUTHOR = {Assari, Shervin and Donovan, Alexandra and Akhlaghipour, Golnoush and Mendez, Mario F},
TITLE = {Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development},
JOURNAL = {Journal of Cellular Neuroscience},
VOLUME = {2},
YEAR = {2025},
NUMBER = {1},
PAGES = {1-11},
URL = {https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JCN/article/view/1241},
ISSN = {3067-1132},
DOI = {10.31586/jcn.2025.1241},
ABSTRACT = {Background: The Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) is a crucial executive control network involved in regulating actions and facilitating higher-order cognitive processes. Resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and the Default Mode Network (DMN) plays a vital role in cognitive regulation, enabling the transition between internally focused and externally directed tasks. This study investigates whether resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and DMN mediates the effects of social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, on cognitive outcomes in youth. Aims: This study aims to explore how CON-DMN connectivity influences the relationship between social gradients and cognition in youth. Specifically, it examines whether resting-state functional connectivity between these networks mediates the effects of educational opportunities and family structure on cognitive outcomes and seeks to uncover the neural mechanisms underlying these social gradients. Methods: Data were derived from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, a large longitudinal dataset of over 11,000 children aged 9–10 years. Cognitive outcomes were assessed using standardized NIH toolbox measures: Total Composite, Fluid Reasoning, Picture Vocabulary, Pattern Recognition, and Card Sorting. Social determinants were operationalized using indicators such as parental education, family composition, and neighborhood educational opportunities (COI). Resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) between the CON and DMN was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to test whether CON-DMN rsFC mediated the relationship between social determinants and cognitive outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders such as age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Results: Stable family structure and greater educational opportunities were significantly associated with improved cognitive performance. These relationships were mediated by reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN. Conclusion: Reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN serves as a neural mechanism linking social gradients, such as educational opportunities and family structure, to better cognitive outcomes in youth.},
}
%0 Journal Article
%A Assari, Shervin
%A Donovan, Alexandra
%A Akhlaghipour, Golnoush
%A Mendez, Mario F
%D 2025
%J Journal of Cellular Neuroscience

%@ 3067-1132
%V 2
%N 1
%P 1-11

%T Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development
%M doi:10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
%U https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JCN/article/view/1241

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Assari, Shervin
AU  - Donovan, Alexandra
AU  - Akhlaghipour, Golnoush
AU  - Mendez, Mario F
TI  - Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development
T2  - Journal of Cellular Neuroscience
PY  - 2025
VL  - 2
IS  - 1
SN  - 3067-1132
SP  - 1
EP  - 11
UR  - https://www.scipublications.com/journal/index.php/JCN/article/view/1241
AB  - Background: The Cingulo-Opercular Network (CON) is a crucial executive control network involved in regulating actions and facilitating higher-order cognitive processes. Resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and the Default Mode Network (DMN) plays a vital role in cognitive regulation, enabling the transition between internally focused and externally directed tasks. This study investigates whether resting-state functional connectivity between the CON and DMN mediates the effects of social determinants, such as educational opportunities and family structure, on cognitive outcomes in youth. Aims: This study aims to explore how CON-DMN connectivity influences the relationship between social gradients and cognition in youth. Specifically, it examines whether resting-state functional connectivity between these networks mediates the effects of educational opportunities and family structure on cognitive outcomes and seeks to uncover the neural mechanisms underlying these social gradients. Methods: Data were derived from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study, a large longitudinal dataset of over 11,000 children aged 9–10 years. Cognitive outcomes were assessed using standardized NIH toolbox measures: Total Composite, Fluid Reasoning, Picture Vocabulary, Pattern Recognition, and Card Sorting. Social determinants were operationalized using indicators such as parental education, family composition, and neighborhood educational opportunities (COI). Resting-state functional connectivity (rsFC) between the CON and DMN was measured using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). Structural equation modeling (SEM) was employed to test whether CON-DMN rsFC mediated the relationship between social determinants and cognitive outcomes, adjusting for potential confounders such as age, sex, and race/ethnicity. Results: Stable family structure and greater educational opportunities were significantly associated with improved cognitive performance. These relationships were mediated by reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN. Conclusion: Reduced functional connectivity between the CON and DMN serves as a neural mechanism linking social gradients, such as educational opportunities and family structure, to better cognitive outcomes in youth.
DO  - Resting-State Functional Connectivity Between the Cingulo-Opercular and Default Mode Networks May Explain Socioeconomic Inequalities in Cognitive Development
TI  - 10.31586/jcn.2025.1241
ER  -
  1. Aartsen MJ, Cheval B, Sieber S, et al. Advantaged socioeconomic conditions in childhood are associated with higher cognitive functioning but stronger cognitive decline in older age. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Mar 19 2019;116(12):5478-5486. doi:10.1073/pnas.1807679116[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Assari S, Boyce S, Mistry R, et al. Parents' Perceived Neighborhood Safety and Children's Cognitive Performance: Complexities by Race, Ethnicity, and Cognitive Domain. Urban Sci. Jun 2021;5(2)doi:10.3390/urbansci5020046[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Beauregard JL, Drews-Botsch C, Sales JM, Flanders WD, Kramer MR. Does Socioeconomic Status Modify the Association Between Preterm Birth and Children's Early Cognitive Ability and Kindergarten Academic Achievement in the United States? Am J Epidemiol. Aug 1 2018;187(8):1704-1713. doi:10.1093/aje/kwy068[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Bennett KK, Buchanan DM, Jones PG, Spertus JA. Socioeconomic status, cognitive-emotional factors, and health status following myocardial infarction: testing the Reserve Capacity Model. J Behav Med. Feb 2015;38(1):110-21. doi:10.1007/s10865-014-9583-4[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Alves AF, Martins A, Almeida LS. Interactions between Sex, Socioeconomic Level, and Children's Cognitive Performance. Psychol Rep. Apr 2016;118(2):471-86. doi:10.1177/0033294116639428[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Amso D, Salhi C, Badre D. The relationship between cognitive enrichment and cognitive control: A systematic investigation of environmental influences on development through socioeconomic status. Dev Psychobiol. Mar 2019;61(2):159-178. doi:10.1002/dev.21794[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Figlio DN, Freese J, Karbownik K, Roth J. Socioeconomic status and genetic influences on cognitive development. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. Dec 19 2017;114(51):13441-13446. doi:10.1073/pnas.1708491114[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Farah MJ, Shera DM, Savage JH, et al. Childhood poverty: specific associations with neurocognitive development. Brain Res. Sep 19 2006;1110(1):166-74. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.06.072[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Kaplan GA, Turrell G, Lynch JW, Everson SA, Helkala EL, Salonen JT. Childhood socioeconomic position and cognitive function in adulthood. Int J Epidemiol. Apr 2001;30(2):256-63. doi:10.1093/ije/30.2.256[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  10. Lang IA, Llewellyn DJ, Langa KM, Wallace RB, Huppert FA, Melzer D. Neighborhood deprivation, individual socioeconomic status, and cognitive function in older people: analyses from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. J Am Geriatr Soc. Feb 2008;56(2):191-8. doi:10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01557.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Song M, Zhou Y, Li J, et al. Brain spontaneous functional connectivity and intelligence. Neuroimage. 2008;41(3):1168-1176.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Plitt M, Barnes KA, Wallace GL, Kenworthy L, Martin A. Resting-state functional connectivity predicts longitudinal change in autistic traits and adaptive functioning in autism. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2015;112(48):E6699-E6706.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Sripada C, Angstadt M, Taxali A, et al. Brain-wide functional connectivity patterns support general cognitive ability and mediate effects of socioeconomic status in youth. Translational psychiatry. 2021;11(1):571.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wallis G, Stokes M, Cousijn H, Woolrich M, Nobre AC. Frontoparietal and cingulo-opercular networks play dissociable roles in control of working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 2015;27(10):2019-2034.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Sheffield JM, Repovs G, Harms MP, et al. Fronto-parietal and cingulo-opercular network integrity and cognition in health and schizophrenia. Neuropsychologia. 2015;73:82-93.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Coste CP, Kleinschmidt A. Cingulo-opercular network activity maintains alertness. Neuroimage. 2016;128:264-272.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Tomiyama H, Murayama K, Nemoto K, et al. Alterations of default mode and cingulo-opercular salience network and frontostriatal circuit: a candidate endophenotype of obsessive-compulsive disorder. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry. 2022;116:110516.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Sheffield JM, Kandala S, Burgess GC, Harms MP, Barch DM. Cingulo-opercular network efficiency mediates the association between psychotic-like experiences and cognitive ability in the general population. Biological psychiatry: cognitive neuroscience and neuroimaging. 2016;1(6):498-506.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  19. Yang H, Zhao X, Wang T, et al. Hypoconnectivity within the cingulo‐opercular network in patients with mild cognitive impairment in Chinese communities. International Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry. 2023;38(8):e5979.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Noble KG, Engelhardt LE, Brito NH, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in neurocognitive development in the first two years of life. Developmental psychobiology. 2015;57(5):535-551.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Noble KG, Farah MJ. Neurocognitive consequences of socioeconomic disparities: the intersection of cognitive neuroscience and public health. Dev Sci. Sep 2013;16(5):639-40. doi:10.1111/desc.12076[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Noble KG, Giebler MA. The Neuroscience of Socioeconomic Inequality. Curr Opin Behav Sci. Dec 2020;36:23-28. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2020.05.007[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Noble KG, McCandliss BD, Farah MJ. Socioeconomic gradients predict individual differences in neurocognitive abilities. Dev Sci. Jul 2007;10(4):464-80. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2007.00600.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Noble KG, Norman MF, Farah MJ. Neurocognitive correlates of socioeconomic status in kindergarten children. Developmental science. 2005;8(1):74-87.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Ursache A, Noble KG, Blair C. Socioeconomic Status, Subjective Social Status, and Perceived Stress: Associations with Stress Physiology and Executive Functioning. Behav Med. 2015;41(3):145-54. doi:10.1080/08964289.2015.1024604[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Brito NH, Fifer WP, Myers MM, Elliott AJ, Noble KG. Associations among family socioeconomic status, EEG power at birth, and cognitive skills during infancy. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Jun 2016;19:144-51. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2016.03.004[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Brito NH, Noble KG. Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Frontiers in neuroscience. 2014;8:276.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Brito NH, Piccolo LR, Noble KG, Pediatric Imaging N, Genetics S. Associations between cortical thickness and neurocognitive skills during childhood vary by family socioeconomic factors. Brain Cogn. Aug 2017;116:54-62. doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2017.03.007[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Merz EC, Maskus EA, Melvin SA, He X, Noble KG. Socioeconomic Disparities in Language Input Are Associated With Children's Language-Related Brain Structure and Reading Skills. Child Dev. May 2020;91(3):846-860. doi:10.1111/cdev.13239[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Noble KG. Rich man, poor man: socioeconomic adversity and brain development. Cerebrum. May-Jun 2014;2014:6.
  31. Noble KG, Engelhardt LE, Brito NH, et al. Socioeconomic disparities in neurocognitive development in the first two years of life. Dev Psychobiol. Jul 2015;57(5):535-51. doi:10.1002/dev.21303[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Brito NH, Noble KG. Socioeconomic status and structural brain development. Front Neurosci. 2014;8:276. doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00276[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Noble KG, Houston SM, Brito NH, et al. Family income, parental education and brain structure in children and adolescents. Nature neuroscience. May 2015;18(5):773. doi:10.1038/nn.3983[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Noble KG, Houston SM, Kan E, Sowell ER. Neural correlates of socioeconomic status in the developing human brain. Dev Sci. Jul 2012;15(4):516-27. doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2012.01147.x[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Troller-Renfree SV, Costanzo MA, Duncan GJ, et al. The impact of a poverty reduction intervention on infant brain activity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 2022;119(5):e2115649119.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Barber AD, Jacobson LA, Wexler JL, et al. Connectivity supporting attention in children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Neuroimage: clinical. 2015;7:68-81.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Shen X, Cox SR, Adams MJ, et al. Resting-state connectivity and its association with cognitive performance, educational attainment, and household income in the UK Biobank. Biological Psychiatry: Cognitive Neuroscience and Neuroimaging. 2018;3(10):878-886.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Yang Y, Kong T, Ji F, Liu R, Luo L. Associations among environmental unpredictability, changes in resting-state functional connectivity, and adolescent psychopathology in the ABCD study. Psychol Med. Nov 18 2024:1-10. doi:10.1017/s0033291724001855[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. ABCD. ABCD Protocl Brocure - Baseline.
  40. Auchter AM, Mejia MH, Heyser CJ, et al. A description of the ABCD organizational structure and communication framework. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:8-15.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Bjork JM, Straub LK, Provost RG, Neale MC. The ABCD study of neurodevelopment: Identifying neurocircuit targets for prevention and treatment of adolescent substance abuse. Current treatment options in psychiatry. 2017;4:196-209.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Casey B, Cannonier T, Conley MI, et al. The adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study: imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:43-54.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Garavan H, Bartsch H, Conway K, et al. Recruiting the ABCD sample: Design considerations and procedures. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Aug 2018;32:16-22. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.04.004[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Gray JC, Schvey NA, Tanofsky-Kraff M. Demographic, psychological, behavioral, and cognitive correlates of BMI in youth: Findings from the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study. Psychol Med. Jul 10 2019;50(9):1-9. doi:10.1017/S0033291719001545[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Casey BJ, Cannonier T, Conley MI, et al. The adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study: imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Developmental cognitive neuroscience. 2018;32:43-54.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Zelazo PD, Bauer PJ. National Institutes of Health Toolbox cognition battery (NIH Toolbox CB): Validation for children between 3 and 15 years. Wiley Hoboken, NJ; 2013.
  47. Weintraub S, Dikmen SS, Heaton RK, et al. Cognition assessment using the NIH Toolbox. Neurology. 2013;80(11_supplement_3):S54-S64.
  48. Weintraub S, Bauer PJ, Zelazo PD, et al. I. NIH Toolbox Cognition Battery (CB): introduction and pediatric data. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 2013;78(4):1-15.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Ryu E. Model fit evaluation in multilevel structural equation models. Front Psychol. 2014;5:81. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00081[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  50. Brito NH, Troller-Renfree SV, Leon-Santos A, Isler JR, Fifer WP, Noble KG. Associations among the home language environment and neural activity during infancy. Dev Cogn Neurosci. Jun 2020;43:100780. doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100780[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. McCandliss BD, Noble KG. The development of reading impairment: a cognitive neuroscience model. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9(3):196-204. doi:10.1002/mrdd.10080[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Vaden KI, Jr., Eckert MA, Dubno JR, Harris KC. Cingulo-opercular adaptive control for younger and older adults during a challenging gap detection task. J Neurosci Res. Apr 2020;98(4):680-691. doi:10.1002/jnr.24506[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Vaden KI, Jr., Kuchinsky SE, Cute SL, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. The cingulo-opercular network provides word-recognition benefit. J Neurosci. Nov 27 2013;33(48):18979-86. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1417-13.2013[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Vaden KI, Jr., Teubner-Rhodes S, Ahlstrom JB, Dubno JR, Eckert MA. Cingulo-opercular activity affects incidental memory encoding for speech in noise. Neuroimage. Aug 15 2017;157:381-387. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2017.06.028[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  55. Wu X, Lin P, Yang J, Song H, Yang R, Yang J. Dysfunction of the cingulo-opercular network in first-episode medication-naive patients with major depressive disorder. J Affect Disord. Aug 2016;200:275-83. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2016.04.046[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Hu M-L, Zong X-F, Mann JJ, et al. A review of the functional and anatomical default mode network in schizophrenia. Neuroscience bulletin. 2017;33:73-84.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  57. Li J, Curley WH, Guerin B, et al. Mapping the subcortical connectivity of the human default mode network. Neuroimage. 2021;245:118758.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Mak LE, Minuzzi L, MacQueen G, Hall G, Kennedy SH, Milev R. The default mode network in healthy individuals: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain connectivity. 2017;7(1):25-33.[CrossRef] [PubMed]