Imaging Brain Development: The Adolescent Brain
Sarah-Jayne Blakemore
SimpleOriginal

Summary

Brain imaging shows teens' brains are still growing and changing, especially the social areas of the brain. Scientists are excited to explore how factors like genes, environment, and even gender, might influence this development.

2012

Imaging Brain Development: The Adolescent Brain

Keywords Neuroimaging; MRI; fMRI; social brain; functional connectivity

Abstract

The past 15 years has seen a rapid expansion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. In this paper, I review MRI studies on structural changes in the developing brain, and fMRI studies on functional changes in the social brain during adoles- cence. Both MRI and fMRI studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. In the final section, I discuss a number of areas of research that are just beginning and may be the subject of devel- opmental neuroimaging in the next twenty years. Future studies might focus on complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain develop- ment; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of the study of the adolescent brain.

Introduction

Half a century ago, very little was known about how the human brain develops and it is unlikely scientists expected that at the turn of the millennium it would be possible to look inside the brains of living humans of all ages and track changes in brain structure and function across development. In the second half of the twentieth century, interest in brain development rapidly increased. Most research in this field relied on non-human animal brains. Data on human brain development were rare because of the scarcity of post-mortem human brains of different ages. It is only in the past 15 years or so, because of advances in imaging techniques, that research has revealed a great deal about the development of the living human brain across the lifespan. Technical advances in neuroimaging methods, in particular, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional MRI (fMRI), have revolutionized what we know about how the human brain develops and have facilitated the rapid expansion of this young research field.

In this paper, I first review early histological studies on the development of the brain. In the next section, I outline recent advances that have made it possible to study the development of the living human brain. In the third section, I review recent MRI studies on structural development in the living human brain. Next, I briefly discuss fMRI developmental imaging studies on the social brain during adolescence. Finally, I look ahead and speculate on some of the key questions for the next 20 years of developmental neuroimaging.

Early studies

Ground-breaking experiments on animals, starting in the 1950s, showed that, soon after birth, sensory regions of the brain go through sensitive periods during which environmental stimulation appears to be crucial for normal brain development and normal perceptual development to occur (Hubel and Wiesel, 1962; Wiesel and Hubel, 1965). Early in postnatal development, the brain begins to form new synapses, so that at some point in early development the synaptic density greatly exceeds adult levels. This process of synaptogenesis lasts up to several months or years, depending on the species of animal, and is followed by a period of synaptic pruning (Cragg, 1975). Which synapses survive and which are selectively eliminated is partly experience-dependent (Changeux and Danchin, 1976; Low and Cheng, 2006). Much of what we know about how the brain develops comes from animal research. For example, research carried out in rhesus monkeys demonstrated that synaptic densities in visual cortex reach maximal levels two to four months after birth, after which time pruning begins (Bourgeois et al., 1994; Rakic, 1995; Rakic et al., 1986; Woo et al., 1997; Zecevic and Rakic, 2001). Synaptic densities gradually decline to adult levels at around three years, around the time rhesus monkeys reach sexual maturity.

In the late 1960s and 1970s research on post-mortem human brains revealed that some brain areas, in particular the prefrontal cortex, continue to develop well beyond early childhood (Huttenlocher, 1979; Huttenlocher et al., 1982; Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). First, it was found that the myelination of axons follows a chronologic sequence, and that the last cortical areas to be myelinated are the association areas, the prefrontal cortex (PFC) among them, where the process of myelination continues for years, well into adolescence (Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). Second, post-mortem human brain data suggested that synaptic reorganisation continues throughout childhood and adolescence in certain brain regions (Webb et al., 2001). Histological studies of human prefrontal cortex have shown that there is a prolif- eration of synapses in the subgranular layers of the prefrontal cortex during early and mid-childhood, followed by a plateau phase and a subsequent elimination and reorganisation of prefrontal synaptic connections during adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979). This finding has recently been supported and expanded by a larger scale study of prefrontal synaptic spine development in 32 post-mortem human brains of different ages across the lifespan (aged one week to 91 years; Petanjek et al., 2011). This study demonstrated that pre- frontal dendritic spine density increases in childhood, resulting in numbers that exceed adult levels two- or three-fold by puberty, and then decreases gradually after puberty (Fig. 1). The elimination of synaptic spines continued beyond adolescence throughout the third decade of life, providing evidence for astonishingly protracted dendritic reorganisation in the human prefrontal cortex.

Figure 1

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 2

Recent advances using MRI

In the past decade or so, the field of developmental cognitive neuroscience has undergone unprecedented expansion, mostly due to technological advances in neuroimaging techniques. There has been a year-on-year increase in the number of papers reporting studies using paediatric neuroimaging published since 1996, as shown in Fig. 2. There have been high profile books (e.g. Johnson, 2004), special issues of several scientific journals and conferences, as well as a new journal (Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience), dedicated to this growing field (see Blakemore et al., 2010a).

Several different neuroimaging techniques have advanced to the point where they can be used reliably to study human brain development across age. EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) have long been regarded as the neuroimaging methods of choice with babies and young children. They have obvious appeal because of their safety, ease of use, and good temporal resolution. The development of func- tional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) is providing a new means to look at cortical activation in infants, since it is non-invasive, rela- tively low cost and portable (Gervain et al., 2011). However, more than any other advance, the increased use of MRI and fMRI in devel- opmental populations has created new opportunities to track structural and functional changes in the developing human brain. This work has advanced our knowledge of how the human brain de- velops, and the data from developmental neuroimaging studies have in turn triggered new interest in the changing structure and function of the brain over the lifespan.

Structural development

Research using MRI to acquire structural images from participants across the lifespan has revealed that the human brain continues to develop for many decades (e.g. Shaw et al., 2008). Age-associated region-specific, linear and non-linear changes in white matter tracts (Giedd et al., 1999; Lebel and Beaulieu, 2011; Ostby et al., 2009; Paus et al., 1999) and cortical grey matter (volume, density, and thickness; Ostby et al., 2009; Paus, 2005; Shaw et al., 2008; Tamnes et al., 2010) have been described in structural MRI studies.

White matter development

One of the most consistent findings from MRI studies is that there is a steady increase in white matter volume in several brain regions during childhood and adolescence. An early developmental MRI study revealed differences in the density of white and grey matter be- tween the brains of a group of children (average age 9 years) and a group of adolescents (average age 14 years; Sowell et al., 1999). The results showed adolescents had a higher volume of white matter and a lower volume of grey matter in the frontal cortex and parietal cortex compared with the younger group. Increased white matter and decreased grey matter density in the frontal and parietal cortices during adolescence is a finding that has been corroborated by several studies carried out by a number of different research groups with increasingly large numbers of subjects (Barnea-Goraly et al., 2005; Giedd et al., 1996, 1999; Paus et al., 1999; Pfefferbaum et al., 1994; Reiss et al., 1996; Sowell et al., 1999). In addition, increases in white matter volume are accompanied by progressive changes in MRI mea- sures of white matter integrity, such as the magnetisation-transfer ratio (MTR) in MRI, and fractional anisotropy (FA) in diffusion- tensor MRI (Fornari et al., 2007; Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008). The MTR indexes the efficiency of magnetization exchange be- tween different tissue compartments, and is strongly influenced by the integrity of myelin membranes. FA is the extent to which the diffusion of water molecules in the brain is anisotropic (not equal in all directions), and higher FA values are thought to reflect increasing organization of white matter tracts (due to processes including myelination and axon density), since water molecules will tend to diffuse in parallel with the tracts. Generally, there is evidence for in- creasing FA during adolescence (see Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010, for review). The increase in white matter seen with age (Fig. 3) has been interpreted as reflecting continued axonal myelination (and/or axonal calibre; Paus et al., 2008) during childhood and adolescence.

Figure 3

Figure 3

Recent DTI evidence for non-linear changes in white matter development has been reported in a longitudinal study of 103 participants from 5 to 32 years (Lebel and Beaulieu, 2011). 10 major white matter tracts were assessed for FA and mean diffusivity (MD; which also corresponds to white matter tract strength). In contrast with earlier studies showing linear increases in white matter volume, this study showed nonlinear development trajectories for FA and MD. FA and MD showed more rapid changes at early ages (increases for FA, decreases for MD), and slower changes or levelling off during young adulthood.

Grey matter development

In another pioneering developmental MRI study, emanating from the National Institute of Mental Health paediatric neuroimaging project, Giedd et al. (1999) performed longitudinal MRI scans on 145 healthy participants ranging in age from about four to 22 years. Scans were obtained from each participant at two-year intervals. The volume of grey matter in the frontal lobe increased during late childhood and early adolescence with a peak occurring at around 12 years. This was followed by a decline during adolescence (Fig. 4). Similarly, parietal-lobe grey matter volume increased during child- hood to a peak at around 12, followed by decline during adolescence. Grey matter development in the temporal lobes was also non-linear, but the peak was reached later at about 17 years. In another longitu- dinal study by the same group, participants aged between 4 and 21 were scanned every two years for 8 to 10 years (Gogtay et al., 2004). In terms of cortical grey matter density, sensory and motor brain regions matured earliest, followed by the remainder of the cor- tex, which matured (in terms of grey matter loss) from posterior to anterior regions. This loss of grey matter occurred last in the superior temporal cortex. A later study analysed cortical thickness and investi- gated the age of at which peak cortical thickness was reached, and again showed earlier maturation in sensory and motor regions and later maturation in parts of the frontal and temporal lobes (Shaw et al., 2008).

Figure 4

Figure 4

An early MRI study by a different group demonstrated a sharp acceleration in grey matter loss between childhood and adolescence in the dorsal prefrontal cortex and the parietal cortex (Sowell et al., 2001). The regions exhibiting the most robust decrease in grey matter density (e.g. the dorsal prefrontal cortex) also exhibited the most robust increase in white matter density. This study revealed that the loss of grey matter in the frontal cortex continued up to the age of 30. A further MRI study of participants ages 7 to 87 revealed a reduction in grey matter density in the dorsal prefrontal, parietal and temporal cortices, accompanied by an increase in white matter, which continued up to the age of 60 (Sowell et al., 2003).

The MRI results demonstrating non-linear developmental changes in grey matter in various brain regions throughout adolescence have been interpreted in several ways. First, age-related decreases in grey matter volume shown in MRI studies have been proposed to be pre- dominantly due to intracortical myelination and increased axonal calibre (Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008; Perrin et al., 2008). This would result in an increase in the volume of tissue that is classified as white matter (and a net reduction in grey matter) in MRI scans. A second explanation is that the grey matter changes reflect the synaptic reorganisation that occurs during puberty and adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979; Petanjek et al., 2011). Thus, specu- latively, the increase in grey matter apparent at around the age of pu- berty onset (Giedd et al., 1999) might reflect a wave of synaptic proliferation at this time, while the gradual decrease in grey matter density that occurs in certain brain regions during adolescence has been attributed to synaptic pruning (Giedd et al., 1999; Gogtay et al., 2004; Sowell et al., 2001). Although changes in synaptic density are likely to be accompanied by changes in glia and other cellular components (Theodosis et al., 2008), whether such changes would be visible as volumetric changes in MRI scans is debated (see Paus et al., 2008).

Developmental functional neuroimaging studies of the social brain in adolescence

Developmental functional imaging, using fMRI, has rapidly expanded in the past decade. In this section I focus on development of the social brain in adolescence as an example of research in this burgeoning field.

The social brain is defined as the network of brain regions in- volved in understanding other people. It includes the network that is involved in theory of mind, or mentalising, the process that enables us to understand other people's actions in terms of the underlying mental states that drive them (Frith and Frith, 2007). For example, we interpret another person reaching towards a coffee pot in terms of a desire for coffee, rather than the mechanical forces used in such an action. Over the past 20 years, a large number of neuroimaging studies in adults have shown remarkable consistency in identifying the brain regions that are involved in mentalising. These studies have employed a wide range of stimuli including stories, sentences, words, cartoons and animations, each designed to elicit the attribution of mental states (see Lieberman, 2012-this issue; Amodio and Frith, 2006; Gilbert et al., 2010). In each case, the mentalising task resulted in the activation of a network of regions including the poste- rior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS)/temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), the anterior temporal cortex (ATC) including the temporal poles and the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC; see Burnett and Blakemore, 2009, for evidence that these regions function as a network).

Recent meta-analyses of MPFC activation by different mentalising tasks indicate that the peak activation lies within the anterior dorsal MPFC (dMPFC; Amodio and Frith, 2006; Gilbert et al., 2006). This region is activated when one thinks about psychological states, regardless of whether these psychological states are applied to oneself (Johnson et al., 2002; Lieberman, 2012-this issue; Lou et al., 2004; Ochsner et al., 2004; van Overwalle, 2009; Vogeley et al., 2001), one's mother (Ruby and Decety, 2004), imagined people (Goel et al., 1995) or animals (Mitchell et al., 2005). Frith has proposed that the dMPFC is involved in the necessary decoupling of mental states from physical reality, whereas the pSTS/TPJ is involved in predicting what movement a conspecific is about to make (Frith, 2007; although see Saxe, 2006, for alternative viewpoint).

fMRI studies of mentalising during adolescence

While many studies over the past 30 years have investigated the development of mentalising in infancy and childhood, pointing to step-wise changes in social cognitive abilities during the first five years of life (Frith and Frith, 2007), recently experimental studies have focused on the development of the social brain beyond child- hood. Recent cognitive neuroscience studies have focused on adolescence as a period of profound social cognitive change. Adolescence is defined as the period of life between puberty and the attainment of a stable, independent role in society (Steinberg, 2010). Adolescence is characterised by psychological changes in terms of identity, self- consciousness and relationships with others (Steinberg, 2010). Compared with children, adolescents are more sociable, form more com- plex and hierarchical peer relationships and are more sensitive to acceptance and rejection by peers (Steinberg and Morris, 2001). While the causes of these social changes in adolescence are likely to be multi-factorial, development of the social brain might play a signif- icant role.

A growing number of fMRI studies have investigated the development of the functional correlates of mentalising during adolescence. These studies have generally compared brain activity during a mentalising task in adolescents and adults. Despite having used a wide variety of mentalising tasks, the results are remarkably consistent: in each of these studies dorso-medial prefrontal cortex (dMPFC) activity was greater in an adolescent group than in an adult group during a mentalising task compared to a control task (see Fig. 5 for meta-analysis).

Figure 5

Figure 5

An early developmental fMRI study of mentalising investigated the development of communicative intent, using a task in which participants had to decipher a speaker's intention (whether they were being sincere or ironic; Wang et al., 2006). In young adolescents (aged 9–14), the dMPFC and left inferior frontal gyrus were more active during this task than in adults (aged 23–33) (see Fig. 5 green dots). A similar region of the dMPFC was found to be more active in adolescents than in adults in an fMRI study that involved thinking about one's own intentions (Blakemore et al., 2007). Adolescents (aged 12–18) and adults (aged 22–38) were presented with scenarios about intentional causality (involving intentions and consequential actions) or physical causality (involving natural events and their consequences). The dMPFC was more active in adolescents than in adults during intentional causality relative to physical causality (Fig. 5 blue dots). Conversely, a region in the right pSTS was more ac- tive in adults than in adolescents when they were thinking about intentional causality compared with physical causality. These results suggest that the neural strategy for thinking about intentions changes from adolescence to adulthood. Although the same neural network is active, the relative roles of the different areas change with age, with activity moving from anterior (dMPFC) regions to posterior (pSTS) regions.

In another developmental study that focused on the processing of self-related sentences (Pfeifer et al., 2007), children (aged 9.5–10.8) and adults (aged 23–31.7) were asked to indicate whether character traits accurately described themselves (self) or someone else (other). The dMPFC was more active in children than in adults during self-knowledge retrieval (see Fig. 5 yellow dots; a similar finding was reported in Pfeifer et al., 2009; grey dot). In another study of mentalising, participants aged 9 to 16 were scanned during an animation-based mentalising task (Moriguchi et al., 2007). Here the picture was more complex: there was a positive correlation between age and activity in the dMPFC, and a negative correlation between age and activity in the ventral MPFC (Fig. 5 red dots). The researchers suggest that this might reflect a change in strategy, from simulation in childhood (based on the self, which involves the ventral MPFC) to a more objective strategy in adults (involving the dMPFC). Note that the oldest participants in this study were 16, and it is unknown how activity within the dMPFC during the animations task changes after this age; it cannot be ruled out that activity in this region de- creases between 16 years of age and adulthood.

Recent studies have focused on emotional aspects of mentalising, and have revealed similar developmental patterns of activity changes. In one study, adolescents (aged 10–18) and adults (aged 22–32) read scenarios that pertained to social emotions such as guilt and embarrassment (Burnett et al., 2009). Unlike basic emotions such as fear and anger, social emotions require the representation of another per- son's mental states (for example, feeling guilty involves imagining how someone else would feel as a consequence of your action). Thinking about social relative to basic emotions activated regions of the social brain, and the dMPFC was more highly activated in adoles- cents than in adults (Burnett et al., 2009; Fig. 5 pink dot). The left ATC showed the opposite pattern of activity: this region was more highly activated by social compared with basic emotions in adults relative to adolescents. These results again suggest that the relative roles of the different areas within the mentalising network change with age, with activity moving from anterior (dMPFC) to posterior (ATC) regions.

Another recent study investigated distinct and overlapping neural substrates of cognitive mentalising (understanding thoughts and intentions) and affective mentalising (understanding emotions), using a theoretical framework proposed by Shamay-Tsoory et al. (2010). A group of adolescents (aged 11–16) and adults (aged 24–40) were scanned while looking at cognitive and affective mentalising cartoons (Sebastian et al., 2012). Both types of cartoon activated the social brain network, while the affective mentalising cartoons activated ventral mPFC to a greater extent than did cognitive mentalising car- toons. Affective mentalising was associated with increased ventral mPFC activity in the adolescents relative to the adults (Fig. 5 orange dot).

Gunther Moor et al. (2012) compared brain activity in young adolescents (aged 10–12), mid-adolescents (14–16) and young adults (19–23) while participants carried out the mind in the eyes paradigm (Baron-Cohen et al., 1997). This task involves making judgements about the mental states and emotions a person is feeling based only on photographs of their eyes. At all ages, greater activity was found in the pSTS during the reading the mind in the eyes task, relative to a control condition that involved making age and gender judgments about the same facial stimuli. Only early adolescents showed addi- tional involvement of the dMPFC (Gunther Moor et al., 2012; Fig. 5 black dot).

A recent developmental fMRI study investigated the Trust Game, in which participants were second players in an investment game. They were given trust by the first player with an amount of money that they could either divide equally between themselves and the first player (reciprocate) or distrust the first player and keep most of the money for themselves (defect) (Van den Bos et al., 2011). A certain degree of mentalising is involved when deciding whether to defect or reciprocate the first player who gave trust in the first place. Three groups of participants, early adolescents (aged 12–14), mid-adolescents (15–17) and young adults (18–22), took part. This rather different type of mentalising-related study demonstrated an age-related decrease in dMPFC activity for reciprocal choices. Specifically, all participants showed activity in this region for defect choices, but only in early adolescence was this region also engaged in reciprocal choices. The activation for reciprocal choices decreased between early and late adolescence and remained stable into early adulthood (Fig. 5 purple dot).

Note that, in these latter two studies, the groups labelled adults were very young; it is unknown how brain activation on these tasks changes after the early twenties. An interesting point here is that much of what we know about adult human behaviour and cognition, and associated neural responses, is based largely on undergraduate students who are over-represented in subject pools. It could be argued that the brain within the typical undergraduate age range (18–22) is still very much developing.

To summarise, a number of developmental neuroimaging studies of mentalising show striking consistency with respect to the direction of change in MPFC activity. Despite the variety of mentalising tasks used, fMRI studies of mental state attribution have consistently shown that MPFC activity during mentalising tasks decreases between adolescence and adulthood. It is not yet understood why this should be, and at least two non-mutually exclusive explanations have been put forward (see Blakemore, 2008, for detailed discussion). One possibility is that the cognitive strategy for mentalising changes between adolescence and adulthood. For example, mentalising in adults may be more automatic than in adolescents, who instead might base their judgement on novel computations performed in the MPFC. This possibility may be related to the skill learning hypothesis (Johnson, 2011), whereby one region first supports a certain function, but another brain region may take over later in development. This would fit with the findings from some of the developmental fMRI studies of mentalising showing that temporal regions of the social brain increase in activation, while dMPFC decrease, during adoles- cence (Blakemore et al., 2007; Burnett et al., 2009). According to this idea, the PFC may be particularly involved during the learning of new abilities and might decrease in activity once a skill has become more automatic (Johnson, 2011).

A second possibility is that the functional change with age is due to neuroanatomical changes that occur during this period. Decreases in activity are frequently interpreted as being due to developmental reductions in grey matter volume, presumably related to synaptic pruning. However, the relationship between structure and function is likely to be more complex than this, and there is currently no direct way to test the relationship between number of synapses, synaptic activity and BOLD signal in humans (see Blakemore, 2008; Harris et al., 2011; and Relationship between structural and functional development).

Developmental cognitive neuroscience — the next twenty years

The field of developmental neuroimaging is still young, and there are still many questions that remain to be tackled. In this section, I look at a few key areas that are predicted to be the focus of research in the next few decades.

Gender differences and puberty

As described in Grey matter development, MRI studies have shown that cortical grey matter changes during childhood and adolescence in a region-specific and predominantly non-linear manner (Giedd et al., 1999; Shaw et al., 2008; Sowell et al., 1999; Tamnes et al., 2010). An early paper by Giedd et al. (1999) showed that the frontal and parietal lobes attain peak grey matter volume at around age 11 in girls and 12 in boys. The ages at which these peaks occur approximately correspond to the sexually dimorphic ages of gonadarche onset, which suggests possible interactions between puberty hormones and grey matter development. Other MRI studies have shown the gradual emergence of sexual dimorphisms across puberty, with increases in amygdala volume during puberty in males only, and increases in hippocampus volume in females only (Lenroot et al., 2007; Neufang et al., 2009).

Relatively little is known about the relationship between gender, puberty and neural development in humans. Evidence from animal studies indicates that the hormonal events of puberty exert profound effects on brain maturation and behaviour (Cahill, 2006; Sisk and Foster, 2004; Spear, 2000). It has been suggested that the hormonal events of puberty trigger a second period of structural reorganisation in the human brain (Sisk and Foster, 2004; Petanjek et al., 2011). However, there is little understanding of the specific relationships be- tween puberty and adolescent brain development (Blakemore et al., 2010b; Dorn, 2006). In recent years, a number of MRI studies have investigated the relationships between structural brain development, gender and puberty (e.g. Raznahan et al., 2010). Neufang et al. (2009) investigated relationships between grey matter volume, gender and puberty measures in participants aged 8–15. Irrespective of gender, there was a positive relationship between pubertal measures and grey matter volume in the amygdala, and a negative relationship be- tween pubertal measures and hippocampal volume. In addition, there were gender-specific effects: females showed a positive relationship between oestrogen levels and limbic grey matter, and males showed a negative relationship between testosterone and parietal cortex grey matter. Furthermore, an adolescent structural MRI study by Peper et al. (2009) showed evidence for a positive association between testosterone levels and global grey matter density in males (and not in females), while females showed a negative association between oestradiol levels and both global and regional grey matter density.

A recent MRI study investigated the effect of sex differences on brain structure in 80 adolescent boys and girls matched on sexual maturity, rather than age (Bramen et al., 2011). The authors investigated measured physical pubertal maturity and testosterone and found significant interactions between sex and puberty in regions with high sex steroid hormone receptor densities: sex differences in the right hippocampus, bilateral amygdala, and cortical grey matter were greater in more sexually mature adolescents. Larger grey matter vol- umes were found in MTL structures in more sexually mature boys, whereas smaller volumes were observed in more sexually mature girls.

These findings are preliminary and require replication, but they represent an important first step in this new area of research. Further work is needed to investigate mechanisms underlying region- specificity and sexual dimorphism in the relationship between puberty hormones and structural brain development.

A number of developmental fMRI studies show gender differences in neural activity in a range of cognitive paradigms (a full review of these findings is beyond the scope of this paper). Generally, the findings of gender differences in activity patterns of the developing brain are not particularly consistent, and there is a need to discover whether gender differences can be replicated, under what conditions and at what ages. Even if robust gender differences are discovered, their aetiology is difficult to decipher. Gender differences may be due to a wide range of innate or environmental factors, including: pre-natal sex hormone effects; gender differences in neurovasculature and gyrification; puberty-independent effects of genes encoded on the sex chromosomes; changes in hormones at puberty; and/or social expectations in the environment. Further studies are needed to eluci- date these complex relationships.

Functional and effective connectivity

Until recently there had been little research on the development of structural, functional and effective connectivity, even though this has potential to elucidate differences in behaviour, cognition and mental state. Functional connectivity analysis examines the statistical dependencies between different brain areas. A baseline measure of this, in the absence of any task, is referred to as resting state function- al connectivity (rsfMRI). Recent studies have employed rsfMRI to describe changes in functional networks across different developmental periods (Fair et al., 2007, 2008, 2009; Supekar et al., 2009; see Power et al., 2010 for a review). These studies have shown differences in organization within and between functional networks between childhood and adulthood, with significant changes occurring during adolescence. Changes within specific networks, such as the default mode network (the network of brain regions that are active during baseline), have been reported during adolescence across several stud- ies employing different analytic approaches (Fair et al., 2008; Jolles et al., 2011; Lopez-Larson et al., 2011; Supekar et al., 2010). An emerging theme within rsfMRI studies is that interactions between different networks reduce with age and that this might reflect enhanced within-network connectivity and more “efficient” (and thus reduced) between-network influences (Fair et al., 2007; Stevens et al., 2009).

There are principally two different ways of analysing task- dependent connectivity: functional and effective connectivity. A classic example of functional connectivity is psycho-physiological interaction (PPI) analysis. PPI analysis is a statistical technique based on linear regression and provides insights that are independent and fundamentally different from those gained by conventional analysis. PPI analysis is based on the principle that if activity in one region (area A) predicts the activity in another region (area B), then the strength of the prediction reflects the influence area A could be exerting on area B. If the strength of the prediction varies with the psychological context in which the physiological activity is measured (i.e. experimental condition) then this is evidence for a psychophysiological interaction (Friston et al., 1997). In PPI analysis, a brain region of interest is defined as the physiological source. Only one previous social brain study has investigated functional connectivity development over adolescence (Burnett and Blakemore, 2009). This study showed that functional connectivity within the mentalising system was higher during social versus basic emotions in adults and adolescents, and that there was a developmental reduction in functional connectivity within the mentalising network, possibly due to increased specialisation and increasingly “efficient” between-network influences (cf Stevens et al., 2009).

In contrast to functional connectivity as assessed by PPIs, effective connectivity methods such as dynamic causal modelling (DCM) (Friston et al., 2003) provide additional information about the directionality of the influence of one area over another. There are surprisingly few developmental neuroimaging studies that have employed effective connectivity methods. Two recent studies using effective connectivity methods have found that, compared to adults, both children (Bitan et al., 2006) and adolescents (Hwang et al., 2010) show weaker top–down modulatory influences from frontal areas during different tasks.

Relationship between structural and functional development

The cellular changes that underlie the change in activity shown by particular brain regions during development are as yet unknown. One hypothesis is that changes at the synapses contribute to developmental changes in BOLD signal. For example, a possible consequence of excess synapses in the human PFC and other cortical regions in early adolescence is that it renders information processing in the relevant brain regions less “efficient”. The excess, “untuned” synapses are thought to result in a low signal-to-noise ratio. Input- dependent synaptic pruning eliminates those excess synapses, thereby effectively fine-tuning the remaining connections into specialised functional networks. Excess synaptogenesis during child- hood might result in increasing levels of activity in the relevant brain region due to a low signal-to-noise ratio of the relevant neuronal networks. After pruning, it is possible that it takes fewer synapses to do same amount of work, because the remaining synapses are more efficient. This would engender a system with a higher signal- to-noise ratio, which might result in more efficient cognitive proces- sing, and possibly lower BOLD signal and improved performance with age. This might account for decreases in BOLD signal between late childhood/early adolescence and adulthood observed in certain cognitive tasks.

However, this is a purely speculative idea and in reality the relationship between structure and function is probably more complex. First, different regions develop at different rates and structural and functional changes within a region are not always parallel. Second, some regions show increases in BOLD signal with age during certain tasks, and decreases in other tasks (see Church et al., 2010). Third, the suggested relationship between synapses and BOLD signal makes several assumptions that are yet to be tested (see Harris et al., 2011 for review). It assumes that a larger number of synapses in a given unit of brain tissue results in an increased BOLD signal if those synapses are active. The notion that the magnitude of the BOLD response is associated with synaptic density assumes a more or less linear relationship between synaptic density and the BOLD sig- nal. Exactly how linear the coupling is between synaptic density and the BOLD response remains to be determined. It is likely that it is dif- ferent across brain regions, and that there is at least some degree of nonlinearity (Lauritzen, 2005). It also makes the assumption that vas- cular changes correlate with synaptic changes; whether this is the case is as yet unknown (Harris et al., 2011). Furthermore, it would be useful to know whether there are correlations between structural changes (in grey matter volume) and functional (BOLD signal) changes in the same individuals. This is surprisingly rarely studied in developmental neuroimaging studies, although recent neuroimag- ing studies on executive control (Konrad et al., 2005), stimulus- independent thought (Dumontheil et al., 2010a), relational reasoning (Dumontheil et al., 2010b), and reading (Lu et al., 2009) have attempted to correlate grey matter changes and functional development. Other studies have combined white matter changes and functional development (for example, in a working memory task; Olesen et al., 2003). These studies have generally found that structural changes account for some, but not all, of the developmental pattern of BOLD signal. Future research should attempt to disentangle possible causal contributions to functional brain development as viewed by fMRI.

Individual differences in brain development

There are large individual differences in adolescent social and behavioural development. Understanding the mechanisms that contribute to these individual differences may shed light on why some adolescents negotiate the social pressures of this developmen- tal period well, while others do not. In addition, vulnerability to many psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety disorders and eating disorders, increases steeply during adolescence (Paus et al., 2008). Twin studies suggest that this is in part due to the emer- gence of new genetic effects during puberty and adolescence (Scourfield et al., 2003). Genetic factors are likely to play an impor- tant role in individual differences. It is well established that genetic polymorphisms (inter-individual variation) affect cognition (Green et al., 2008). Highly heritable individual differences in cognitive ability are associated with structural differences in specific regions of the cortex (Toga and Thompson, 2005). How genes interact with environment in the context of brain development is already the focus of a growing number of developmental neuroimaging studies.

A distinctively under-researched area in cognitive neuroscience is how context and culture affect brain development. Research from cross-cultural psychology has shown that the experience of adoles- cence is variable and contingent upon culture (Choudhury, 2010). The lives of teenagers from different cultures can be dramatically different and it is unknown how this shapes their brains. It has been suggested, for example, that characteristics that are common in teenagers in the West, such as intergenerational conflict, stem from cultural values of individualism in Western societies, which are less prominent in pre-industrial societies (Choudhury, 2010). There are cultural variations in puberty onset, which tends to be earlier in in- dustrialized countries than in pre-industrial societies, possibly due to differences in dietary intake (Berkey et al., 2000). In addition, the end of adolescence, being socially defined, is vastly different between different cultures. A critical issue for future research is to disentangle genetically pre-programmed developmental changes and changes that are due to culture and the environment. An interesting specula- tion is that adolescence represents a period of synaptic reorganisation and, as a consequence, some areas of the brain might be particularly sensitive to experiential input at this period of life.

Translational outcomes of developmental neuroimaging

Much of what we have learned from developmental neuroimaging is focused on the typically developing brain. While the basic science is of course necessary to pave the foundations for translational research, in recent years studies have started to focus on the health and educa- tion consequence of the developing adolescence brain. Here, I mention three areas: mental health, education and the law.

A disproportionate number of psychiatric conditions typically have their onset in adolescence (Paus et al., 2008). These include anxiety disorders, depression, eating disorders, addiction and schizophrenia (usually at the end of adolescence). This suggests that adolescence may represent a sensitive period in terms of the neurobiological events that underlie these conditions. There is already a large and rapidly expanding literature on brain development in developmental disorders and psychiatric conditions, and some of these are large-scale and longitudinal (e.g. Giedd and Rapoport, 2010; Shaw et al., 2010). A full review of this large and growing literature is beyond the scope of this paper. Current and future research should include longitudinal aspects to track brain development in adolescents who are at high risk from developing a certain condition, and compare development in those who do, versus those who do not, develop the condition.

Research into the cognitive implications of continued brain maturation beyond childhood may be relevant to the social development and educational attainment of adolescents. Further studies are necessary to reach a consensus about how axonal myelination, and synaptic pruning and proliferation impact on social, emotional, linguistic, mathematical and creative development. In other words, which skills undergo perturbation, which undergo sensitive periods for enhancement and how does the quality of the environment interact with brain changes in the development of cognition is unknown whether greater emphasis on social and emotional cognitive development would be beneficial during adolescence is unknown, but research will provide insights into potential intervention schemes in secondary schools, for example, remediation pro- grammes or schemes for tackling anti-social behaviour.

Research in developmental neuroimaging can also contribute to the debate about juvenile crime, for instance the age of criminal responsibility, which in the UK is 10 years. In the USA, some minors receive life sentences without the possibility of parole. A dialogue between psychologists, neuroscientists, the legal profession and policy makers has already begun in the context of juvenile crime and the age of criminal responsibility. Continued input from neuroscience would be useful to shape future legislative procedures concerning adolescents. The plentiful data that consistently paint a picture of the adolescent brain as relatively immature might speak against the relatively young age of criminal responsibility and harsh sentences for adolescents. Of course, these debates are profoundly complex and neuroscience data cannot provide the answers alone. Developmental neuroimaging data also suggest that the brain is still developing during adolescence, and that it is not too late for rehabilitation.

Conclusion

In this paper, I have reviewed MRI and fMRI studies on structural and functional changes in the adolescent brain. The ability to see inside the developing human brain and to track developmental changes, both in terms of structure and function, is relatively recent. The past 15 years has seen an explosion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. These studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. The next twenty years of developmental neuroimaging might focus on more complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain development; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of study of the adolescent brain. This is an exciting time for developmental cognitive neuroscience, a young field that is set to continue to expand and mature over the next two decades.

Link to Article

Abstract

The past 15 years has seen a rapid expansion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. In this paper, I review MRI studies on structural changes in the developing brain, and fMRI studies on functional changes in the social brain during adoles- cence. Both MRI and fMRI studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. In the final section, I discuss a number of areas of research that are just beginning and may be the subject of devel- opmental neuroimaging in the next twenty years. Future studies might focus on complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain develop- ment; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of the study of the adolescent brain.

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience: Progress and Prospects

Introduction

Five decades ago, our understanding of human brain development was rudimentary. Scientists at the time could scarcely have envisioned the advancements that would allow us to peer inside the living human brain across the lifespan. The latter half of the 20th century witnessed a surge in brain development research, primarily reliant on animal models due to the limited availability of human brain tissue across different ages. However, the past 15 years have ushered in a revolution, fueled by technological leaps in neuroimaging, particularly magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional MRI (fMRI). These techniques have unveiled the dynamic landscape of the developing human brain, fostering the rapid growth of this field.

This paper first examines early histological investigations into brain development. It then delineates recent breakthroughs enabling the study of the living human brain across development. The subsequent section reviews contemporary MRI research on structural changes in the living human brain. A brief discussion of fMRI studies exploring social brain development during adolescence follows. Finally, the paper concludes by contemplating key questions that will shape the next 20 years of developmental neuroimaging.

Early Studies

Pioneering animal studies, commencing in the 1950s, demonstrated the existence of sensitive periods in early postnatal development, during which environmental stimulation is critical for typical brain development and perceptual maturation (Hubel and Wiesel, 1962; Wiesel and Hubel, 1965). These studies showed that the brain undergoes a phase of heightened synaptogenesis shortly after birth, resulting in synaptic densities surpassing those of adults. This period is succeeded by a process of synaptic pruning, the duration of which varies across species (Cragg, 1975). The selection of synapses for elimination or maintenance is partly influenced by experience (Changeux and Danchin, 1976; Low and Cheng, 2006). Animal models have been instrumental in shaping our understanding of brain development. For example, research in rhesus monkeys revealed peak synaptic densities in the visual cortex two to four months postnatally, followed by a period of pruning (Bourgeois et al., 1994; Rakic, 1995; Rakic et al., 1986; Woo et al., 1997; Zecevic and Rakic, 2001). This decline in synaptic density continues until approximately three years of age, coinciding with the attainment of sexual maturity in this species.

In the late 1960s and 1970s, investigations utilizing post-mortem human brain tissue revealed prolonged development in certain brain regions, notably the prefrontal cortex, extending well beyond early childhood (Huttenlocher, 1979; Huttenlocher et al., 1982; Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). These studies demonstrated that: (1) Axonal myelination follows a chronological sequence, with association areas, including the prefrontal cortex (PFC), exhibiting the most protracted myelination process, extending well into adolescence (Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). (2) Synaptic reorganization persists throughout childhood and adolescence in specific brain regions (Webb et al., 2001). Histological examinations of the human PFC revealed a surge in synapse formation within the subgranular layers during early and mid-childhood. This is followed by a plateau phase and a subsequent period of synaptic elimination and reorganization during adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979). These findings were corroborated and expanded upon by a larger study examining prefrontal synaptic spine development in 32 post-mortem human brains, spanning ages one week to 91 years (Petanjek et al., 2011). This study illustrated a peak in prefrontal dendritic spine density during puberty, exceeding adult levels two- to three-fold, followed by a gradual decline post-puberty (Fig. 1). This elimination of synaptic spines persisted beyond adolescence and throughout the third decade of life, underscoring the protracted nature of dendritic reorganization in the human PFC.

Recent Advances Using MRI

The last decade has witnessed an unprecedented expansion of developmental cognitive neuroscience, largely driven by technological progress in neuroimaging. This is evident in the year-on-year increase in publications featuring pediatric neuroimaging studies since 1996, as illustrated in Fig. 2. This burgeoning field has spurred the publication of influential books (e.g. Johnson, 2004), dedicated journal issues and conferences, and even a new journal, "Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience" (see Blakemore et al., 2010a).

Several neuroimaging modalities have advanced to a point where they can reliably investigate human brain development across the lifespan. EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) have long been favored for studying infants and young children due to their safety, ease of use, and high temporal resolution. The emergence of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), a non-invasive, relatively inexpensive, and portable technique, provides a novel approach for examining cortical activation in infants (Gervain et al., 2011). However, the escalating use of MRI and fMRI in pediatric populations has been particularly transformative, enabling the tracking of structural and functional changes in the developing human brain and prompting renewed interest in lifespan brain development.

Structural Development

MRI studies have revealed that the human brain undergoes continuous development for decades (e.g. Shaw et al., 2008). These investigations have uncovered age-related, region-specific, linear and non-linear alterations in both white matter tracts (Giedd et al., 1999; Lebel and Beaulieu, 2011; Ostby et al., 2009; Paus et al., 1999) and cortical grey matter (volume, density, and thickness; Ostby et al., 2009; Paus, 2005; Shaw et al., 2008; Tamnes et al., 2010).

White Matter Development

A consistent finding across MRI studies is the steady increase in white matter volume in various brain regions throughout childhood and adolescence. An early study reported greater white matter volume and reduced grey matter volume in the frontal and parietal cortices of adolescents (average age 14 years) compared to children (average age 9 years; Sowell et al., 1999). This pattern of white matter increase and grey matter decrease in these regions during adolescence has been replicated by numerous studies with increasingly larger sample sizes (Barnea-Goraly et al., 2005; Giedd et al., 1996, 1999; Paus et al., 1999; Pfefferbaum et al., 1994; Reiss et al., 1996; Sowell et al., 1999). Moreover, these increases in white matter volume are accompanied by progressive improvements in MRI measures of white matter integrity, such as the magnetization-transfer ratio (MTR) and fractional anisotropy (FA) derived from diffusion-tensor MRI (Fornari et al., 2007; Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008). MTR reflects the efficiency of magnetization exchange between tissue compartments, heavily influenced by myelin membrane integrity. FA quantifies the directional dependence of water diffusion, with higher values indicating greater organization of white matter tracts (potentially reflecting myelination and axon density). Typically, FA increases throughout adolescence (see Schmithorst and Yuan, 2010 for a review). The observed increase in white matter with age (Fig. 3) is attributed to continued axonal myelination (and/or axonal caliber; Paus et al., 2008) during childhood and adolescence.

Recent DTI research has revealed non-linear white matter development trajectories in a longitudinal study of 103 individuals aged 5 to 32 years (Lebel and Beaulieu, 2011). Assessments of FA and mean diffusivity (MD), another indicator of white matter tract strength, in 10 major white matter tracts revealed non-linear developmental trajectories. Specifically, FA and MD exhibited more rapid changes at younger ages (FA increases, MD decreases), transitioning to slower changes or plateaus during young adulthood.

Grey Matter Development

In a landmark longitudinal MRI study from the National Institute of Mental Health pediatric neuroimaging project, Giedd et al. (1999) scanned 145 healthy individuals aged 4 to 22 years at two-year intervals. They observed an increase in frontal lobe grey matter volume during late childhood and early adolescence, peaking around 12 years of age, followed by a decline during adolescence (Fig. 4). A similar non-linear pattern was observed in the parietal lobe, with peak grey matter volume occurring around 12 years of age. The temporal lobes also exhibited non-linear grey matter development, albeit with a later peak around 17 years of age. Another longitudinal investigation by the same group, involving participants aged 4 to 21 scanned biennially for 8 to 10 years, examined cortical grey matter density (Gogtay et al., 2004). Sensory and motor regions exhibited the earliest maturation, followed by the remaining cortex, which matured (in terms of grey matter loss) in a posterior-to-anterior progression. The superior temporal cortex was the last region to undergo this grey matter loss. A subsequent study examining cortical thickness corroborated these findings, revealing earlier maturation in sensory and motor regions and later maturation in parts of the frontal and temporal lobes (Shaw et al., 2008).

An early MRI study by Sowell et al. (2001) demonstrated a pronounced acceleration in grey matter loss between childhood and adolescence in the dorsal prefrontal cortex and parietal cortex. The regions exhibiting the most robust grey matter decrease (e.g., dorsal prefrontal cortex) also demonstrated the most pronounced white matter increase. This study found that grey matter loss in the frontal cortex persisted until around 30 years of age. A further study by the same group, involving participants aged 7 to 87, reported a reduction in grey matter density in the dorsal prefrontal, parietal, and temporal cortices, coupled with an increase in white matter, extending up to 60 years of age (Sowell et al., 2003).

Several interpretations have been proposed for the non-linear developmental changes in grey matter observed in various brain regions throughout adolescence. One hypothesis posits that age-related decreases in grey matter volume primarily reflect intracortical myelination and increased axonal caliber (Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008; Perrin et al., 2008), leading to a greater volume of tissue classified as white matter (and a net reduction in grey matter) in MRI scans. Another explanation attributes these grey matter alterations to synaptic reorganization occurring during puberty and adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979; Petanjek et al., 2011). Speculatively, the observed increase in grey matter around puberty onset (Giedd et al., 1999) could reflect a wave of synaptic proliferation, while the subsequent gradual decline in grey matter density in certain brain regions during adolescence may reflect synaptic pruning (Giedd et al., 1999; Gogtay et al., 2004; Sowell et al., 2001). However, it remains debated whether changes in synaptic density, likely accompanied by alterations in glia and other cellular components (Theodosis et al., 2008), would be detectable as volumetric changes in MRI scans (see Paus et al., 2008).

Developmental Functional Neuroimaging Studies of the Social Brain in Adolescence

Developmental functional imaging, particularly fMRI, has experienced rapid growth in the past decade. This section will focus on the development of the social brain during adolescence as a prime example of this burgeoning field.

The "social brain" refers to the network of brain regions responsible for understanding other people. It encompasses the mentalizing network, which enables us to comprehend others' actions by attributing them to underlying mental states (Frith and Frith, 2007). For example, we interpret someone reaching for a coffee pot as driven by a desire for coffee, rather than merely mechanical forces. The past 20 years have seen numerous neuroimaging studies in adults, consistently identifying a core network of brain regions involved in mentalizing. These studies have employed diverse stimuli, including stories, sentences, words, cartoons, and animations, all designed to elicit mental state attribution (see Lieberman, 2012-this issue; Amodio and Frith, 2006; Gilbert et al., 2010). Across these paradigms, mentalizing tasks consistently activate a network comprising the posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS)/temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), the anterior temporal cortex (ATC) including the temporal poles, and the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC; see Burnett and Blakemore, 2009, for evidence supporting their network function).

Meta-analyses of MPFC activation across various mentalizing tasks pinpoint peak activation within the anterior dorsal MPFC (dMPFC; Amodio and Frith, 2006; Gilbert et al., 2006). This region is engaged when individuals consider psychological states, whether attributed to oneself (Johnson et al., 2002; Lieberman, 2012-this issue; Lou et al., 2004; Ochsner et al., 2004; van Overwalle, 2009; Vogeley et al., 2001), one's mother (Ruby and Decety, 2004), imagined individuals (Goel et al., 1995), or animals (Mitchell et al., 2005). Frith has proposed that the dMPFC is crucial for decoupling mental states from physical reality, while the pSTS/TPJ is involved in predicting conspecifics' actions (Frith, 2007; although see Saxe, 2006, for an alternative viewpoint).

fMRI Studies of Mentalizing During Adolescence

While extensive research over the past three decades has explored the development of mentalizing during infancy and childhood, highlighting step-wise changes in social cognitive abilities within the first five years of life (Frith and Frith, 2007), recent experimental studies have shifted their focus to social brain development beyond childhood. These investigations have identified adolescence as a period of significant social cognitive change. Defined as the period between puberty and the attainment of a stable, independent societal role (Steinberg, 2010), adolescence is characterized by psychological transformations in identity, self-consciousness, and relationships (Steinberg, 2010). Adolescents, compared to children, are more sociable, form more intricate and hierarchical peer relationships, and exhibit greater sensitivity to peer acceptance and rejection (Steinberg and Morris, 2001). While these social changes likely arise from multiple factors, social brain development may play a substantial role.

An increasing number of fMRI studies have examined the development of the functional neural correlates of mentalizing during adolescence. These studies typically compare brain activity during mentalizing tasks between adolescents and adults. Despite utilizing diverse paradigms, their findings converge on a consistent pattern: heightened dMPFC activity in adolescents compared to adults during mentalizing tasks relative to control tasks (see Fig. 5 for a meta-analysis).

An early fMRI study examined the development of communicative intent, employing a task requiring participants to infer a speaker's intention (sincerity vs. irony; Wang et al., 2006). The dMPFC and left inferior frontal gyrus exhibited greater activation in young adolescents (aged 9–14) compared to adults (aged 23–33) during this task (see Fig. 5 green dots). Similar dMPFC hyperactivation in adolescents (aged 12–18) compared to adults (aged 22–38) was observed in a study requiring participants to reason about intentions (Blakemore et al., 2007). Participants were presented with scenarios involving either intentional causality (intentions and their consequences) or physical causality (natural events and their consequences). The dMPFC exhibited greater activity in adolescents than adults during the intentional causality condition relative to the physical causality condition (Fig. 5 blue dots). Conversely, the right pSTS displayed greater activity in adults than adolescents during intentional causality processing. These results suggest a developmental shift in the neural strategies for reasoning about intentions. While the same network is engaged, the relative contribution of specific regions changes with age, shifting from anterior (dMPFC) to posterior (pSTS) regions.

Another study exploring the processing of self-related sentences (Pfeifer et al., 2007) presented children (aged 9.5–10.8) and adults (aged 23–31.7) with character traits and asked them to indicate whether these traits accurately described themselves or someone else. The dMPFC exhibited greater activity in children than adults during self-knowledge retrieval (see Fig. 5 yellow dots; similar findings reported in Pfeifer et al., 2009; grey dot). In a study employing an animation-based mentalizing task with participants aged 9 to 16 (Moriguchi et al., 2007), a more complex pattern emerged. Age positively correlated with dMPFC activity, while negatively correlating with ventral MPFC activity (Fig. 5 red dots). This may reflect a developmental shift from a simulation-based strategy in childhood (relying on the self-related ventral MPFC) to a more objective strategy in adulthood (involving the dMPFC). Notably, the oldest participants in this study were 16, leaving open the question of how dMPFC activity during this task changes beyond this age; a decline between 16 years of age and adulthood cannot be ruled out.

Recent studies have focused on the emotional facets of mentalizing, revealing similar developmental patterns. One study involved adolescents (aged 10–18) and adults (aged 22–32) reading scenarios eliciting social emotions (e.g., guilt, embarrassment; Burnett et al., 2009). Unlike basic emotions like fear and anger, social emotions necessitate the representation of another person's mental states (e.g., guilt involves imagining another's feelings as a consequence of one's actions). Relative to basic emotions, processing social emotions activated the social brain network, with adolescents exhibiting greater dMPFC activation than adults (Burnett et al., 2009; Fig. 5 pink dot). Conversely, the left ATC showed greater activation for social emotions in adults compared to adolescents. These findings further support a developmental shift in the relative contributions of different regions within the mentalizing network, transitioning from anterior (dMPFC) to posterior (ATC) regions.

Another study (Sebastian et al., 2012) examined the distinct and overlapping neural substrates of cognitive mentalizing (understanding thoughts and intentions) and affective mentalizing (understanding emotions), based on a framework proposed by Shamay-Tsoory et al. (2010). Adolescents (aged 11–16) and adults (aged 24–40) viewed cartoons depicting either cognitive or affective mentalizing scenarios. While both cartoon types activated the social brain network, affective mentalizing cartoons elicited greater ventral mPFC activity than cognitive mentalizing cartoons. Importantly, adolescents exhibited greater ventral mPFC activity during affective mentalizing compared to adults (Fig. 5 orange dot).

Gunther Moor et al. (2012) compared brain activity across three age groups – young adolescents (aged 10–12), mid-adolescents (14–16), and young adults (19–23) – during the "Reading the Mind in the Eyes" paradigm (Baron-Cohen et al., 1997). This task requires participants to infer mental states and emotions solely from photographs of individuals' eyes. All age groups displayed greater pSTS activation during the mentalizing task compared to a control task involving age and gender judgments of the same facial stimuli. However, only early adolescents exhibited additional dMPFC involvement (Gunther Moor et al., 2012; Fig. 5 black dot).

A recent developmental fMRI study utilized the Trust Game, where participants acted as second players in an investment game (Van den Bos et al., 2011). After receiving an initial investment from the first player, participants could choose to either reciprocate (split the money equally) or defect (keep most of the money). This paradigm requires a degree of mentalizing to determine whether to reciprocate or exploit the first player's trust. Three age groups participated: early adolescents (aged 12–14), mid-adolescents (15–17), and young adults (18–22). This unique mentalizing-related study revealed an age-related decline in dMPFC activity for reciprocal choices. While all participants exhibited dMPFC activation for defect choices, only early adolescents engaged this region during reciprocal choices. This activation for reciprocal choices decreased between early and late adolescence, stabilizing into early adulthood (Fig. 5 purple dot).

It is crucial to note that the "adult" groups in the latter two studies were relatively young, leaving open the question of how brain activation during these tasks changes beyond the early twenties. Furthermore, much of our understanding of adult human behavior, cognition, and associated neural responses is based heavily on undergraduate student samples, who are overrepresented in subject pools. However, the brain within this typical undergraduate age range (18–22) may still be undergoing substantial development.

In summary, numerous developmental neuroimaging studies of mentalizing consistently demonstrate an age-related decline in MPFC activity from adolescence to adulthood, regardless of the specific mentalizing task employed. The reasons for this remain unclear, with at least two non-mutually exclusive explanations proposed (see Blakemore, 2008 for a detailed discussion). One possibility is a developmental shift in the cognitive strategies employed for mentalizing. Adults may engage in more automatic mentalizing than adolescents, who may rely on novel computations performed within the MPFC. This aligns with the skill learning hypothesis (Johnson, 2011), which posits that while one brain region may initially support a given function, another region may assume this role later in development. This is consistent with findings from some developmental fMRI studies demonstrating increased activation in temporal regions of the social brain and decreased dMPFC activation during adolescence (Blakemore et al., 2007; Burnett et al., 2009). This suggests that the PFC may be particularly involved during the acquisition of new skills, with its activity diminishing as the skill becomes more automatic (Johnson, 2011).

Alternatively, this age-related functional change may stem from neuroanatomical changes occurring during this period. Decreases in activity are often attributed to developmental reductions in grey matter volume, potentially reflecting synaptic pruning. However, the structure-function relationship is likely more intricate, and there is currently no direct method for examining the relationship between synapse number, synaptic activity, and BOLD signal in humans (see Blakemore, 2008; Harris et al., 2011; and Relationship between structural and functional development).

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience – The Next Twenty Years

As a relatively young field, developmental neuroimaging still faces numerous unanswered questions. This section highlights several key areas predicted to drive research in the coming decades.

Gender Differences and Puberty

As discussed in Grey matter development, MRI studies have revealed region-specific, predominantly non-linear changes in cortical grey matter throughout childhood and adolescence (Giedd et al., 1999; Shaw et al., 2008; Sowell et al., 1999; Tamnes et al., 2010). Giedd et al. (1999) reported peak grey matter volume in the frontal and parietal lobes around age 11 in girls and 12 in boys, aligning with the sexually dimorphic timing of gonadarche onset. This suggests potential interplay between pubertal hormones and grey matter development. Other MRI studies have documented the gradual emergence of sexual dimorphisms across puberty, including male-specific increases in amygdala volume and female-specific increases in hippocampus volume during this period (Lenroot et al., 2007; Neufang et al., 2009).

Our understanding of the relationship between gender, puberty, and human neural development remains limited. Animal studies have established the profound influence of pubertal hormones on brain maturation and behavior (Cahill, 2006; Sisk and Foster, 2004; Spear, 2000), leading to suggestions that these hormonal events trigger a second wave of structural reorganization in the human brain (Sisk and Foster, 2004; Petanjek et al., 2011). However, the precise relationship between puberty and adolescent brain development remains poorly understood (Blakemore et al., 2010b; Dorn, 2006). Nevertheless, recent years have seen an increase in MRI studies investigating the interplay between structural brain development, gender, and puberty (e.g. Raznahan et al., 2010). For example, Neufang et al. (2009) examined the relationships between grey matter volume, gender, and pubertal measures in participants aged 8–15. Irrespective of gender, pubertal measures positively correlated with amygdala grey matter volume and negatively correlated with hippocampal volume. Furthermore, gender-specific effects were observed: oestrogen levels positively correlated with limbic grey matter volume in females, while testosterone levels negatively correlated with parietal cortex grey matter volume in males. Another adolescent structural MRI study by Peper et al. (2009) reported a positive association between testosterone levels and global grey matter density in males (but not females), while females exhibited a negative association between estradiol levels and both global and regional grey matter density.

A recent MRI study by Bramen et al. (2011) examined sex differences in brain structure in 80 adolescent boys and girls matched for sexual maturity rather than age. Investigating physical pubertal maturity and testosterone levels, the authors discovered significant interactions between sex and puberty in regions rich in sex steroid hormone receptors: sex differences in the right hippocampus, bilateral amygdala, and cortical grey matter were more pronounced in more sexually mature adolescents. Greater grey matter volumes in medial temporal lobe (MTL) structures were observed in more sexually mature boys, while smaller volumes were observed in more sexually mature girls.

These findings are preliminary and require replication, but represent a crucial first step in this nascent research area. Further investigation is needed to elucidate the mechanisms underlying the region-specificity and sexual dimorphism observed in the relationship between pubertal hormones and structural brain development.

Several developmental fMRI studies have reported gender differences in neural activity across various cognitive paradigms (a comprehensive review is beyond the scope of this paper). However, these findings lack consistency, highlighting the need to determine whether and under what conditions these gender differences can be replicated, and at what ages. Furthermore, even if robust gender differences are established, their etiology remains challenging to decipher. Potential contributing factors include a multitude of innate and environmental influences, such as prenatal sex hormone effects, neurovascular and gyrification differences, puberty-independent effects of sex chromosome genes, pubertal hormone changes, and societal expectations. Future research must disentangle these complex relationships.

Functional and Effective Connectivity

Despite its potential for elucidating differences in behavior, cognition, and mental states, the development of structural, functional, and effective connectivity has received relatively little attention until recently. Functional connectivity analysis investigates the statistical dependencies between different brain regions. Resting state fMRI (rsfMRI) examines these dependencies in the absence of any task. Recent studies have utilized rsfMRI to characterize changes in functional networks across developmental stages (Fair et al., 2007, 2008, 2009; Supekar et al., 2009; see Power et al., 2010 for a review), revealing differences in the organization within and between functional networks between childhood and adulthood, with significant changes occurring during adolescence. For example, several studies employing different analytical approaches have reported developmental changes in specific networks, such as the default mode network (active during baseline), during adolescence (Fair et al., 2008; Jolles et al., 2011; Lopez-Larson et al., 2011; Supekar et al., 2010). A recurring theme in rsfMRI research is the age-related reduction in inter-network interactions, potentially reflecting enhanced within-network connectivity and more "efficient" (and thus reduced) between-network influences (Fair et al., 2007; Stevens et al., 2009).

Two primary approaches exist for analyzing task-dependent connectivity: functional and effective connectivity. Psycho-physiological interaction (PPI) analysis exemplifies functional connectivity analysis. This statistical technique, based on linear regression, provides insights distinct from those obtained through conventional analyses. PPI analysis rests on the principle that if activity in region A predicts activity in region B, the strength of this prediction reflects the potential influence of A on B. Variations in this predictive strength across different psychological contexts (i.e. experimental conditions) suggest a psychophysiological interaction (Friston et al., 1997). In PPI analysis, a brain region of interest serves as the physiological source. Only one prior social brain study has examined functional connectivity development during adolescence (Burnett and Blakemore, 2009). This study found greater functional connectivity within the mentalizing system during social emotion processing compared to basic emotion processing in both adolescents and adults. Moreover, a developmental reduction in functional connectivity within the mentalizing network was observed, potentially reflecting increased specialization and more "efficient" between-network influences (cf. Stevens et al., 2009).

Unlike functional connectivity assessed via PPIs, effective connectivity methods like dynamic causal modeling (DCM) (Friston et al., 2003) provide information about the directionality of influence between brain regions. Surprisingly few developmental neuroimaging studies have employed these techniques. Two recent studies utilizing effective connectivity found weaker top-down modulatory influences from frontal areas in both children (Bitan et al., 2006) and adolescents (Hwang et al., 2010) compared to adults across different tasks.

Relationship Between Structural and Functional Development

The cellular underpinnings of developmental changes in regional brain activity remain unknown. One hypothesis posits that synaptic changes contribute to these developmental changes in BOLD signal. For example, the excess synapses observed in the human PFC and other cortical regions during early adolescence may render information processing in these regions less "efficient," resulting in a low signal-to-noise ratio due to "untuned" synapses. Input-dependent synaptic pruning eliminates these superfluous synapses, effectively fine-tuning the remaining connections into specialized functional networks. This excess synaptogenesis during childhood may result in heightened activity in relevant brain regions due to a low signal-to-noise ratio within the relevant neural circuits. Post-pruning, fewer synapses may be required to perform the same amount of work due to increased efficiency of the remaining connections. This would result in a system with a higher signal-to-noise ratio, potentially leading to more efficient cognitive processing, possibly reflected in lower BOLD signal and improved task performance with age. This may explain the observed decreases in BOLD signal between late childhood/early adolescence and adulthood in certain cognitive tasks.

However, this remains speculative, and the structure-function relationship is likely far more complex. First, different brain regions develop at different rates, and structural and functional changes within a given region do not always proceed in parallel. Second, some regions exhibit age-related increases in BOLD signal during certain tasks and decreases during others (see Church et al., 2010). Third, the proposed relationship between synapses and BOLD signal relies on several untested assumptions (see Harris et al., 2011 for a review). It assumes that a greater number of active synapses within a given brain region results in increased BOLD signal. The notion that BOLD response magnitude is associated with synaptic density further assumes a linear or near-linear relationship between these two variables. However, the precise nature of this coupling remains to be determined, and it likely varies across brain regions and exhibits some degree of nonlinearity (Lauritzen, 2005). Furthermore, this assumption presupposes a correlation between vascular and synaptic changes, which remains unverified (Harris et al., 2011). Finally, it would be valuable to examine potential correlations between structural (grey matter volume) and functional (BOLD signal) changes within individuals. Despite its rarity in developmental neuroimaging studies, this approach has been employed in recent investigations of executive control (Konrad et al., 2005), stimulus-independent thought (Dumontheil et al., 2010a), relational reasoning (Dumontheil et al., 2010b), and reading (Lu et al., 2009). Other studies have integrated white matter changes and functional development, for example, in working memory (Olesen et al., 2003). These studies generally find that structural changes account for some, but not all, of the developmental patterns observed in BOLD signal. Future research should endeavor to disentangle the potential causal contributions to functional brain development as measured by fMRI.

Individual Differences in Brain Development

Adolescent social and behavioral development is characterized by substantial individual variability. Understanding the mechanisms underlying this variability may elucidate why some individuals navigate the social pressures of this developmental period more successfully than others. Additionally, adolescence marks a period of heightened vulnerability to various psychiatric disorders, including depression, anxiety disorders, and eating disorders (Paus et al., 2008). Twin studies suggest that this increased vulnerability is partly attributable to the emergence of new genetic effects during puberty and adolescence (Scourfield et al., 2003), highlighting the likely role of genetic factors in individual differences. It is well-established that genetic polymorphisms (inter-individual variations) influence cognition (Green et al., 2008). Highly heritable individual differences in cognitive ability are associated with structural differences in specific cortical regions (Toga and Thompson, 2005). Consequently, an increasing number of developmental neuroimaging studies are exploring the interaction between genes and environment in the context of brain development.

One area that remains particularly underexplored in cognitive neuroscience is the influence of context and culture on brain development. Cross-cultural psychology research has demonstrated the variability of the adolescent experience across cultures, underscoring its dependence on cultural context (Choudhury, 2010). Given the dramatic differences in the lives of teenagers across cultures, the impact of these experiences on brain development remains unknown. For example, it has been proposed that characteristics common among Western teenagers, such as intergenerational conflict, stem from the emphasis on individualism in Western societies, a value less prominent in pre-industrial societies (Choudhury, 2010). Cultural variations also exist in pubertal onset, which tends to occur earlier in industrialized nations compared to pre-industrial societies, potentially due to dietary differences (Berkey et al., 2000). Furthermore, the socially defined end of adolescence varies substantially across cultures. Disentangling genetically pre-programmed developmental changes from those shaped by culture and environment represents a critical challenge for future research. One intriguing possibility is that adolescence, as a period of significant synaptic reorganization, may render certain brain regions particularly sensitive to experiential input during this time.

Translational Outcomes of Developmental Neuroimaging

Much of our current knowledge derived from developmental neuroimaging centers on the typically developing brain. While this basic science foundation is essential for translational research, recent years have witnessed a growing focus on the health and education implications of the developing adolescent brain. This section briefly discusses three such areas: mental health, education, and law.

A disproportionate number of psychiatric disorders, including anxiety disorders, depression, eating disorders, addiction, and schizophrenia (typically emerging in late adolescence), exhibit onset during adolescence (Paus et al., 2008). This suggests that adolescence may represent a sensitive period for the neurobiological events underpinning these conditions. Consequently, a vast and rapidly expanding literature, including large-scale longitudinal studies, has emerged on brain development in developmental disorders and psychiatric conditions (e.g. Giedd and Rapoport, 2010; Shaw et al., 2010). A comprehensive review of this literature is beyond the scope of this paper. However, it is crucial for current and future research to incorporate longitudinal designs to track brain development in individuals at high risk for specific conditions, enabling comparisons between those who develop the condition and those who do not.

Investigating the cognitive implications of continued brain maturation beyond childhood may yield insights relevant to adolescent social development and educational attainment. Future research is needed to reach a consensus on how axonal myelination, synaptic pruning, and proliferation impact social, emotional, linguistic, mathematical, and creative development. In other words, we need to determine which skills undergo perturbation, which exhibit sensitive periods for enhancement, and how environmental quality interacts with brain changes to shape cognitive development. It remains unknown whether greater emphasis on social and emotional cognitive development during adolescence would be beneficial. However, research in this area has the potential to inform the development of intervention programs in secondary schools, such as remediation programs or initiatives aimed at addressing antisocial behavior.

Developmental neuroimaging research can also inform discussions surrounding juvenile crime, such as the age of criminal responsibility, currently set at 10 years in the UK. In the US, some minors receive life sentences without the possibility of parole. A dialogue has begun between psychologists, neuroscientists, legal professionals, and policymakers regarding juvenile crime and the age of criminal responsibility. Continued contributions from neuroscience, particularly regarding the relative immaturity of the adolescent brain, are crucial for shaping future legislative procedures concerning adolescents. Indeed, the wealth of data consistently portraying the adolescent brain as still developing argues against the current low age of criminal responsibility and the imposition of harsh sentences on adolescents. Of course, these are multifaceted issues, and neuroscience data alone cannot provide definitive answers. However, developmental neuroimaging findings suggest that the brain continues to develop throughout adolescence, highlighting the potential for rehabilitation during this period.

Conclusion

This paper has reviewed MRI and fMRI studies examining structural and functional changes in the adolescent brain. The ability to peer inside the living, developing human brain and track these developmental changes is a relatively recent development. The past 15 years have witnessed a surge in research utilizing neuroimaging techniques to investigate brain maturation, highlighting adolescence as a period of continued neural development.

Link to Article

Abstract

The past 15 years has seen a rapid expansion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. In this paper, I review MRI studies on structural changes in the developing brain, and fMRI studies on functional changes in the social brain during adoles- cence. Both MRI and fMRI studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. In the final section, I discuss a number of areas of research that are just beginning and may be the subject of devel- opmental neuroimaging in the next twenty years. Future studies might focus on complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain develop- ment; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of the study of the adolescent brain.

The Amazing Developing Brain: Insights from Neuroimaging

Fifty years ago, we knew very little about how the human brain developed. Scientists at the time could hardly have imagined that we would one day be able to peer inside the living brain and observe its development across the lifespan. During the latter half of the 20th century, interest in brain development surged. However, most research relied on animal models due to the lack of available human brains for study. It was not until the last 15 years, with significant advancements in brain imaging technology like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and functional MRI (fMRI), that the field of developmental neuroscience truly blossomed. These technologies have revolutionized our understanding of the living human brain and its remarkable journey of development.

This paper will first delve into early histological studies that laid the groundwork for our understanding of brain development. We will then explore the recent technological leaps that now allow us to study the living human brain. Next, we will examine recent MRI findings about structural brain development. We will then touch upon fMRI studies that focus on the social brain during adolescence. Finally, we will look to the future and ponder some key questions that will likely drive the next 20 years of research in developmental neuroimaging.

Early Studies

Pioneering animal studies, beginning in the 1950s, revealed that soon after birth, sensory brain areas undergo "sensitive periods." During these periods, environmental stimulation is critical for the brain to develop normally and for typical perceptual abilities to emerge (Hubel & Wiesel, 1962; Wiesel & Hubel, 1965). Early in life, the brain starts forming an abundance of new connections between brain cells (synapses). This process, called synaptogenesis, leads to a peak in synaptic density that eventually exceeds adult levels. This peak is followed by a period of synaptic pruning, where unnecessary connections are eliminated (Cragg, 1975). Interestingly, experience plays a crucial role in determining which synapses survive and which are pruned away (Changeux & Danchin, 1976; Low & Cheng, 2006). For example, research on rhesus monkeys revealed that synaptic density in the visual cortex peaks two to four months after birth, followed by pruning that gradually reduces synaptic density to adult levels by around three years of age, coinciding with their sexual maturity (Bourgeois et al., 1994; Rakic, 1995; Rakic et al., 1986; Woo et al., 1997; Zecevic & Rakic, 2001).

In the late 1960s and 1970s, research on post-mortem human brains revealed that certain brain areas, particularly the prefrontal cortex (PFC) – the brain's executive control center – continue to develop well beyond early childhood (Huttenlocher, 1979; Huttenlocher et al., 1982; Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). One key finding was that the insulation of brain fibers (myelination) follows a specific timeline, with association areas like the PFC being the last to be fully myelinated. This process extends well into adolescence (Yakovlev & Lecours, 1967). Furthermore, post-mortem data suggested that synaptic reorganization continues throughout childhood and adolescence in certain brain areas (Webb et al., 2001). Studies of the human PFC specifically showed a burst of synapse formation during early and mid-childhood, followed by a plateau and then a period of elimination and reorganization of synaptic connections during adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979). A larger study examining prefrontal synaptic development in 32 post-mortem human brains (aged one week to 91 years) supported and expanded upon these findings. It showed that synaptic density in the PFC peaks during puberty, exceeding adult levels by two- or three-fold, and then gradually decreases after puberty (Petanjek et al., 2011). Interestingly, this elimination of synapses continued well into the third decade of life, highlighting the remarkably prolonged period of synaptic fine-tuning in the human PFC (Fig. 1).

Recent Advances using MRI

The past decade has witnessed an explosion in developmental cognitive neuroscience, largely fueled by advancements in neuroimaging techniques like MRI and fMRI. Figure 2 illustrates the year-on-year surge in publications using these techniques to study the developing human brain. This surge reflects a new era in our ability to track structural and functional changes in the living brain across different ages.

Structural Development

MRI studies of individuals across the lifespan reveal that the human brain continues to develop for many decades (e.g. Shaw et al., 2008). These studies have uncovered intriguing age-related, region-specific changes in white matter tracts (Giedd et al., 1999; Lebel & Beaulieu, 2011; Ostby et al., 2009; Paus et al., 1999) and grey matter (volume, density, and thickness) (Ostby et al., 2009; Paus, 2005; Shaw et al., 2008; Tamnes et al., 2010) .

White Matter Development

A consistent finding from MRI studies is the steady increase in white matter volume in various brain regions during childhood and adolescence. An early study revealed differences in white and grey matter density between children (average age 9 years) and adolescents (average age 14 years). Adolescents displayed greater white matter volume and reduced grey matter volume in the frontal and parietal cortices compared to children (Sowell et al., 1999). This pattern of increased white matter and decreased grey matter density in these regions during adolescence has been repeatedly confirmed by numerous studies (Barnea-Goraly et al., 2005; Giedd et al., 1996, 1999; Paus et al., 1999; Pfefferbaum et al., 1994; Reiss et al., 1996; Sowell et al., 1999).

This age-related increase in white matter, depicted in Figure 3, is thought to reflect ongoing myelination – the insulation of nerve fibers – and potentially increases in axon caliber (Paus et al., 2008). Supporting this, MRI techniques sensitive to white matter integrity, like magnetization transfer ratio (MTR) and fractional anisotropy (FA), show progressive changes during adolescence. These changes, such as increasing FA, are thought to reflect increasing organization and efficiency of white matter tracts (Fornari et al., 2007; Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008).

Interestingly, recent research using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) suggests that white matter development may not follow a simple linear trajectory. A longitudinal study of 103 individuals aged 5 to 32 revealed non-linear developmental trajectories for both FA and mean diffusivity (MD) – another measure of white matter integrity (Lebel & Beaulieu, 2011). Instead of steady increases, FA and MD showed rapid changes in early life, followed by slower changes or plateaus during young adulthood. These findings suggest that white matter development is a dynamic process with distinct phases.

Grey Matter Development

In a groundbreaking longitudinal MRI study, Giedd et al. (1999) scanned 145 healthy individuals aged four to 22 at two-year intervals. Their findings revealed that grey matter volume in the frontal lobe increases during late childhood and peaks around age 12, followed by a decline throughout adolescence (Fig. 4). A similar pattern was observed in the parietal lobe, while the peak in the temporal lobes occurred later, around age 17. This non-linear pattern of grey matter development, with varying peak ages for different brain regions, suggests a complex interplay of developmental processes.

Further research by the same group, using longitudinal scans of individuals aged 4 to 21, confirmed this non-linear pattern and provided a clearer timeline for cortical maturation (Gogtay et al., 2004). Sensory and motor areas matured earliest, followed by a wave of maturation – characterized by grey matter loss – that progressed from the back (posterior) to the front (anterior) of the brain. Intriguingly, the superior temporal cortex, involved in social cognition, was the last region to mature. Another study investigating cortical thickness corroborated these findings, revealing earlier maturation in sensory and motor regions and later maturation in parts of the frontal and temporal lobes (Shaw et al., 2008).

These findings of non-linear grey matter development have sparked numerous interpretations. One prominent theory suggests that the observed decreases in grey matter volume may be primarily due to increased myelination and axon caliber within the cortex itself (Giorgio et al., 2010; Paus et al., 2008; Perrin et al., 2008). As myelination increases, more tissue is categorized as white matter in MRI scans, leading to an apparent decrease in grey matter volume. Another explanation posits that the observed changes reflect the significant synaptic reorganization that occurs during puberty and adolescence (Huttenlocher, 1979; Petanjek et al., 2011). The initial increase in grey matter around puberty might reflect a wave of synapse formation, while the subsequent decline is attributed to synaptic pruning – the elimination of unnecessary connections (Giedd et al., 1999; Gogtay et al., 2004; Sowell et al., 2001).

Developmental Functional Neuroimaging Studies of the Social Brain in Adolescence

The advent of fMRI has fueled a rapid expansion of research on functional brain development during adolescence, a period of profound social and cognitive change. This section focuses on the development of the "social brain," the network of brain regions involved in understanding other people.

The social brain encompasses the network responsible for "theory of mind" or "mentalizing" – our ability to understand others' actions by inferring their underlying mental states (Frith & Frith, 2007). Neuroimaging studies in adults have consistently identified key brain regions within the social brain network, including the posterior superior temporal sulcus (pSTS)/temporo-parietal junction (TPJ), the anterior temporal cortex (ATC) including the temporal poles, and the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC) (Burnett & Blakemore, 2009). Within the MPFC, the anterior dorsal MPFC (dMPFC) appears particularly important for thinking about psychological states, whether our own, those of others, or even imagined characters (Amodio & Frith, 2006; Frith, 2007; Gilbert et al., 2006; Goel et al., 1995; Johnson et al., 2002; Lieberman, 2012; Lou et al., 2004; Mitchell et al., 2005; Ochsner et al., 2004; Ruby & Decety, 2004; van Overwalle, 2009; Vogeley et al., 2001).

fMRI Studies of Mentalizing during Adolescence

While research on the developing social brain initially focused on infancy and childhood, recent studies have shifted towards understanding its development beyond childhood. Adolescence is a time of significant social and emotional development, marked by increased sociability, the formation of more complex peer relationships, and heightened sensitivity to social acceptance and rejection (Steinberg, 2010; Steinberg & Morris, 2001).

fMRI studies comparing brain activity during mentalizing tasks in adolescents and adults have revealed a consistent pattern: adolescents show greater dMPFC activity compared to adults (see Fig. 5 for a meta-analysis). This suggests that adolescents may engage the dMPFC to a greater extent when thinking about mental states. For instance, in a study investigating the development of understanding communicative intent (e.g., sincerity vs. irony), young adolescents (aged 9-14) exhibited greater dMPFC and left inferior frontal gyrus activity compared to adults (aged 23-33) (Wang et al., 2006; see Fig. 5 green dots). Similarly, when asked to think about their own intentions, adolescents (aged 12-18) showed greater dMPFC activation than adults (aged 22-38) (Blakemore et al., 2007; Fig. 5 blue dots). Conversely, adults showed greater activity in the right pSTS – another key region within the social brain – during the same task, suggesting a shift in neural strategy for thinking about intentions from adolescence to adulthood.

This shift in activity from anterior (dMPFC) to posterior (pSTS) regions within the social brain network during adolescence has been observed in other studies as well (Blakemore et al., 2007; Burnett et al., 2009). For example, when processing self-related sentences, children (aged 9.5-10.8) showed greater dMPFC activation compared to adults (aged 23-31.7) (Pfeifer et al., 2007, 2009; Fig. 5 yellow and grey dots), while adolescents showed greater ventral mPFC activation than adults when processing affective (emotion-based) mentalizing cartoons (Sebastian et al., 2012; Fig. 5 orange dot).

These findings suggest that while the same brain regions are involved in mentalizing across ages, the way these regions interact and contribute to social cognitive processing changes during adolescence. One possibility is that mentalizing becomes more automatic and efficient with age, leading to reduced reliance on the dMPFC (Blakemore, 2008; Johnson, 2011).

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience - The Next Twenty Years

The field of developmental neuroimaging is still in its early stages, with many unanswered questions. This section highlights a few key areas that are likely to be the focus of research in the coming decades.

Gender Differences and Puberty: As previously discussed, MRI studies have revealed significant sex differences in brain structure and development, particularly during puberty (Bramen et al., 2011; Giedd et al., 1999; Lenroot et al., 2007; Neufang et al., 2009; Peper et al., 2009; Raznahan et al., 2010). These differences likely reflect the potent influence of sex hormones on brain development, but the precise mechanisms and implications for social and cognitive development remain to be fully elucidated.

Functional and Effective Connectivity: Understanding how different brain regions communicate and work together is crucial for understanding complex cognitive processes like mentalizing. Recent research has begun to explore the development of functional and effective connectivity within the social brain and other networks during adolescence. These studies suggest that brain networks become more specialized and interconnected with age, potentially leading to greater efficiency and less reliance on frontal brain regions like the dMPFC (Burnett & Blakemore, 2009; Fair et al., 2007, 2008, 2009; Hwang et al., 2010; Jolles et al., 2011; Lopez-Larson et al., 2011; Power et al., 2010; Stevens et al., 2009; Supekar et al., 2009, 2010).

Relationship between Structural and Functional Development: Unraveling the precise relationship between structural changes (e.g., grey matter volume, white matter integrity) and functional changes (e.g., BOLD signal) in the developing brain remains a key challenge. While some studies have attempted to correlate these changes, the findings are complex and suggest that the relationship is not always straightforward (Church et al., 2010; Dumontheil et al., 2010a, 2010b; Harris et al., 2011; Konrad et al., 2005; Lauritzen, 2005; Lu et al., 2009; Olesen et al., 2003). Future research will need to disentangle the intricate interplay of factors influencing brain development and its relationship to cognitive function.

Individual Differences in Brain Development: Adolescents exhibit considerable variability in their social, emotional, and cognitive development. Understanding the factors contributing to this variability, such as genetics, environment, and culture, is crucial for identifying adolescents at risk for mental health problems or academic difficulties and for developing targeted interventions.

Translational Outcomes of Developmental Neuroimaging: Ultimately, research on brain development aims to improve the lives of adolescents. This includes understanding the neurobiological basis of mental health disorders, informing educational practices, and guiding legal policies related to adolescents. For example, insights into the developing brain have the potential to inform debates about the age of criminal responsibility and the potential for rehabilitation in young offenders.

Conclusion

The ability to peer inside the living human brain and track its development is revolutionizing our understanding of this remarkable organ. Developmental neuroimaging has revealed that the brain continues to develop well beyond childhood, with adolescence being a period of significant structural and functional refinement. This knowledge has the potential to transform how we approach mental health, education, and legal policies affecting adolescents. The coming decades promise even greater insights as this young field continues to mature and address the many remaining questions about the amazing developing brain.

Link to Article

Abstract

The past 15 years has seen a rapid expansion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. In this paper, I review MRI studies on structural changes in the developing brain, and fMRI studies on functional changes in the social brain during adoles- cence. Both MRI and fMRI studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. In the final section, I discuss a number of areas of research that are just beginning and may be the subject of devel- opmental neuroimaging in the next twenty years. Future studies might focus on complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain develop- ment; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of the study of the adolescent brain.

How Does Your Brain Grow Up? A Look Inside the Teenage Mind

Introduction

Fifty years ago, we knew very little about how the human brain grows and changes. Scientists probably never imagined that we'd be able to peek inside the brains of living people, let alone track how they develop throughout life. Since the late 1900s, scientists have been using amazing brain imaging technology, especially MRI and fMRI, to uncover the secrets of the developing brain. These techniques have revolutionized our understanding of how our brains change from childhood to adulthood.

Early Studies: Clues from Animals and Brains

In the mid-1900s, scientists conducted groundbreaking experiments on animals, revealing that right after birth, certain parts of the brain responsible for our senses go through critical periods. During these periods, interaction with the environment is crucial for the brain to develop normally (Hubel and Wiesel, 1962; Wiesel and Hubel, 1965).

Think of it like learning a language: a baby's brain is primed to learn language, but they need to hear and interact with language for it to develop properly. Similarly, early experiences shape the development of areas responsible for sight, sound, touch, and other senses.

Animal studies also showed that early in life, the brain forms tons of connections between brain cells (called synapses), way more than it needs. This process is followed by "synaptic pruning," where unnecessary connections are trimmed away, much like a gardener prunes a bush for healthier growth (Cragg, 1975). Importantly, experiences influence which connections stay and which ones go (Changeux and Danchin, 1976; Low and Cheng, 2006).

Studies on donated human brains in the late 1960s and 1970s showed that some brain areas, particularly the prefrontal cortex (the part behind your forehead), keep developing well past childhood (Huttenlocher, 1979; Huttenlocher et al., 1982; Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). This area is involved in planning, decision-making, and self-control. These studies found that the insulation around brain cells (called myelin) continues to develop well into adolescence in the prefrontal cortex (Yakovlev and Lecours, 1967). Further research also indicated that the connections in this area continue to be reorganized throughout childhood and the teenage years (Webb et al., 2001).

More recently, a study on 32 donated human brains confirmed that the number of connections in the prefrontal cortex peaks during the teenage years and then gradually decreases into adulthood (Petanjek et al., 2011). This ongoing rewiring highlights how much the brain changes, even after childhood.

Recent Advances Using MRI: A Window into the Growing Brain

Over the last 15 years, brain imaging has exploded! Scientists are using techniques like MRI to see inside the living brain and discover how it changes over time (e.g., Shaw et al., 2008).

White Matter Development: The Brain's Superhighways

MRI studies consistently reveal that the brain's "white matter," which acts like superhighways connecting different parts of the brain, keeps growing during childhood and the teenage years. This growth is likely due to the insulation (myelin) around brain cells becoming thicker and stronger, making messages travel faster and more efficiently.

Grey Matter Development: The Brain's Thinking Centers

Grey matter, on the other hand, houses the brain cells responsible for processing information. MRI studies have shown that grey matter volume in certain areas, like the prefrontal cortex, actually peaks in early adolescence and then gradually decreases (Giedd et al., 1999; Gogtay et al., 2004; Shaw et al., 2008). This might seem surprising, but it's thought to be due to synaptic pruning, where unnecessary connections are eliminated, making the brain more efficient.

Developmental fMRI Studies of the Social Brain in Adolescence: Navigating the Social World

Functional MRI (fMRI) allows us to see which parts of the brain are active during specific tasks. This has been particularly useful in understanding how the "social brain," the network of brain areas that helps us understand other people, develops during adolescence.

A key part of the social brain is the ability to "mentalize," or understand that other people have thoughts, feelings, and intentions different from our own. fMRI studies have shown that when teenagers think about other people's minds, they use different brain areas compared to adults (Blakemore, 2008). Specifically, teenagers tend to rely more on the dMPFC, an area in the front of the brain, while adults rely more on areas in the side of the brain (like the pSTS/TPJ and ATC).

These findings suggest that teenagers' brains might process social information differently than adults. As teenagers gain more experience and their brains continue to develop, they may become more efficient and sophisticated in their social understanding.

Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience: The Next 20 Years

The field of developmental cognitive neuroscience is still young and full of unanswered questions. In the coming years, scientists will be investigating:

  • Gender Differences and Puberty: How do hormones released during puberty affect brain development differently in males and females?

  • Functional and Effective Connectivity: How do the connections between different brain areas change during adolescence?

  • Relationship Between Structural and Functional Development: How do changes in brain structure relate to changes in brain function?

  • Individual Differences in Brain Development: Why do some teenagers thrive while others struggle? What makes some individuals more vulnerable to mental health difficulties during adolescence?

  • Translational Outcomes of Developmental Neuroimaging: How can we use our understanding of the teenage brain to improve mental health care, education, and the legal system for adolescents?

Conclusion

The teenage brain is a work in progress, constantly changing and adapting. New imaging technologies have given us an unprecedented view into these changes, revealing that adolescence is a period of significant brain development.

The next 20 years promise even more exciting discoveries as scientists continue to unlock the mysteries of the teenage brain. This research has the potential to transform how we support teenagers as they navigate the challenges and opportunities of this critical period.

Link to Article

Abstract

The past 15 years has seen a rapid expansion in the number of studies using neuroimaging techniques to investigate maturational changes in the human brain. In this paper, I review MRI studies on structural changes in the developing brain, and fMRI studies on functional changes in the social brain during adoles- cence. Both MRI and fMRI studies point to adolescence as a period of continued neural development. In the final section, I discuss a number of areas of research that are just beginning and may be the subject of devel- opmental neuroimaging in the next twenty years. Future studies might focus on complex questions including the development of functional connectivity; how gender and puberty influence adolescent brain develop- ment; the effects of genes, environment and culture on the adolescent brain; development of the atypical adolescent brain; and implications for policy of the study of the adolescent brain.

Introduction

For a long time, scientists studied animal brains because it was difficult to examine human brains. But in the last 15 years, thanks to incredible inventions like MRI scans, scientists can now see inside the brains of living people. This has allowed us to learn so much about how our brains change as we grow from babies to adults and even older.

Early Discoveries

Back in the 1950s, scientists discovered amazing things about baby animals. They found that right after birth, the parts of the brain responsible for our senses, like sight and hearing, go through super important growth spurts. During these times, experiencing the world around them is crucial for their brains to develop correctly. During these early years, the brain makes tons of connections, way more than it needs, like building extra roads in a new city. This is followed by a period of "synaptic pruning," where the brain gets rid of connections it doesn't use anymore, much like getting rid of those extra roads (Cragg, 1975).

In the 60s and 70s, scientists studied human brains after people had passed away. They found that certain areas, especially the prefrontal cortex (the part behind your forehead), keep developing even after childhood (Huttenlocher, 1979). This area is responsible for important things like planning and making decisions. One of the key discoveries was that the prefrontal cortex continues to develop for a very long time, well into our teenage years!

MRI: A Window into the Brain

In recent years, scientists have developed incredible tools, like MRI machines, which are like giant magnets that can take pictures of our brains. These pictures help us understand how our brains change as we grow. Because of MRI, the study of brain development has exploded. New discoveries are happening all the time.

How Our Brains Grow

Studies using MRI have shown that our brains continue to change for many years. They have helped us discover that different parts of the brain grow at different speeds.

White Matter: Making Connections Stronger

One of the most exciting findings is that a part of our brain called "white matter" keeps growing throughout childhood and the teenage years. White matter is like the insulation around electrical wires, helping messages travel quickly in the brain. This growth is vital for learning and thinking more complex thoughts (Giedd et al., 1999).

Grey Matter: Making the Brain More Efficient

Another fascinating discovery is how "grey matter" changes in our brains. Grey matter is where the brain cells are, and it's responsible for processing information. This area grows a lot during childhood but then starts to decrease during the teenage years. This doesn't mean we are getting less smart! It's because the brain is becoming more efficient, getting rid of connections it doesn't need and making the important ones stronger (Giedd et al., 1999).

The Social Brain: Understanding Others

One area scientists are particularly interested in is the "social brain," which helps us understand other people's thoughts and feelings. This part of the brain is still developing during our teenage years. Studies have shown that teenagers use different parts of their brains compared to adults when they try to figure out what someone else is thinking or feeling (Blakemore et al., 2007).

What's Next for Brain Science?

Scientists are still working on answering big questions about:

  • The impact of puberty: How do the hormonal changes of puberty affect brain development in boys and girls?

  • The power of connections: How do different parts of the brain work together, and how do these connections change as we grow?

  • Individual differences: Why do some people's brains develop differently than others? What role do genes and environment play?

By understanding how the brain grows and changes, we can learn to help people of all ages reach their full potential. This research can help us improve education, treat mental health issues, and create a better future for everyone.

Link to Article

Footnotes and Citation

Cite

Blakemore, S.-J. (2012). Imaging Brain Development: The adolescent brain. NeuroImage, 61(2), 397–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.11.080

    Highlights