The link between brain structure and intelligence is a well-investigated topic. However, the majority of existing studies have been conducted on adult samples. These prior studies mostly show modest positive correlations between intelligence and brain morphology in a network of brain areas, mainly comprising frontal and parietal regions, but also areas within the temporal and occipital lobes (
Jung and Haier, 2007;
Luders et al., 2009). Studies conducted in healthy children and adolescents are rare but seem to suggest that the relation of intelligence to brain structure changes over time, as children grow older. For example,
Karama et al. (2009) reported no significant associations between cortical thickness and the general cognitive factor in children (6–11.9 years) when applying FDR corrections, while adolescents (12–18.3 years) showed numerous areas where correlations were significantly positive. Moreover,
Shaw et al. (2006) reported a developmental shift from a primarily negative correlation between intelligence and cortical thickness in early childhood (3.8–8.4 years) to a positive correlation in late childhood (8.6–11.7), early adolescence (11.8–16.9 years), and early adulthood (17–29 years), where positive correlations were maximal in late childhood.
Wilke et al. (2003) illustrated that positive and negative correlations were apparent in children and adolescents aged 5–19 years, but only positive correlations reached statistical significance starting after the age of 12 years. Similarly, the brain regions showing the strongest links to intelligence seemed to differ depending on the age group examined. For example,
Wilke et al. (2003) reported more pronounced effects in younger children (<12 years) for deep gray matter structures, while correlations in older children (>12 years) were most significant in the cingulate.
Frangou et al. (2004), who examined subjects aged 12–21 years (without splitting their sample into different age groups) detected significant positive correlations in the orbitofrontal cortex, cingulate, cerebellum, and thalamus as well as negative correlations in the caudate nucleus.
We hypothesized that such age-dependent associations between anatomical and cognitive measures are not only evident in cortical and subcortical regions, but also in the corpus callosum (i.e., the largest inter-hemispheric fiber structure connecting many of these regions). Midsagittal callosal area has been shown to be an indicator of the total number of small diameter fibers connecting both hemispheres (
Aboitiz et al., 1992). Since small diameter fibers are particularly involved in transferring higher-order cognitive information (
Aboitiz, 1992), callosal morphology may thus link with the capacity for inter-hemispheric transfer and/or with hemispheric specialization which may modulate intellectual abilities. Indeed, a number of studies suggest that the structural integrity of the corpus callosum is associated with intellectual abilities (
Atkinson, Jr. et al., 1996;
Aukema et al., 2009;
Chiang et al., 2009;
Davatzikos and Resnick, 1998;
Fletcher et al., 1992;
Kulak et al., 2007;
Luders et al., 2007;
Schatz and Buzan, 2006;
Spencer et al., 2005;
Strauss et al., 1994;
Wozniak et al., 2009). However, there is a lack of such studies in healthy children and adolescents.
Thus, to advance this field of research and to characterize the link between callosal morphology and intelligence in younger populations, we selected a large sample of children and adolescents (n=200), aged 6–17 years, from a normative database of subjects (
Evans, 2006). We applied advanced surface-based mesh-modeling methods and mapped correlations between callosal thickness and standardized intelligence measures for this overall sample but also within four equally-sized subgroups, each spanning three years of age. The overarching goal of our study was to establish the presence and direction of correlations between callosal thickness and intelligence in the developing brain (i.e., in individuals younger than 18 years old). Given that existing links between brain structure and cognitive measures may remain disguised or biased towards the effect of the sex that is more heavily represented in the sample when pooling males and females (
Haier et al., 2005), our study also addressed possible sex effects. This was achieved by including equal numbers of males and females (both in the overall sample and within subgroups), by testing for significant interactions with sex, and by conducting analyses separately within males and females if significant sex interactions were detected.