Search tips
Search criteria 


Logo of nihpaAbout Author manuscriptsSubmit a manuscriptHHS Public Access; Author Manuscript; Accepted for publication in peer reviewed journal;
Curr Opin Neurobiol. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2014 June 1.
Published in final edited form as:
PMCID: PMC3664098

Social ties and health: A social neuroscience perspective


Research over the last several decades has shown that the health of the body is intimately tied to the strength of our social connections, but why? This article reviews evidence from affective and social neuroscience suggesting that, because of the importance of social ties for mammalian survival, threats to social connection are processed by some of the same neural regions that process basic threats to survival and consequently trigger physiological threat responses that have negative health implications. Likewise, social support is processed by some of the same neural regions that process safety or protection from basic threats and inhibit these same health-relevant physiological threat responses.


The mammalian nervous system has evolved with an incredible capacity to respond to threats to survival. In response to basic threats to survival—such as predators, environmental dangers, or injuries—the body responds with a coordinated set of physiological responses that increases chances of survival. For example, threats to survival trigger the activation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS), implicated in the fight-or-flight response, and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, involved in mobilizing energy resources for dealing with long-lasting threats. Each of these systems then has downstream effects on the immune system, possibly preparing the body for dealing with the increased likelihood of wounding associated with these threats. For example, increased SNS activity upregulates inflammatory activity, the body's first line of defense against foreign agents [1,2]. However, the body's ability to adapt to acute threats in the short-term has also been credited as the cause of the long-term negative health effects of stress. Thus, chronic, threat-related increases in inflammatory activity can contribute to the development of various inflammatory-related diseases (diabetes, atherosclerosis) as well as mortality [3,4].

Interestingly, over the past several decades, research has shown that, like basic threats to survival, threats to social connection can have similar effects on these health-relevant physiological responses. For example, in response to a social-evaluative stressor (such as the Trier Social Stress Test [5]), which involves the possibility of being socially rejected or devalued while delivering a public speech, subjects show increases in SNS, HPA, and inflammatory responding [6,7]. Additionally, relative to those who feel socially connected, individuals who feel lonely or socially disconnected show elevated proinflammatory cytokine levels and enhanced proinflammatory gene expression [8,9]. Indeed, the fact that social experience can alter physiological stress responses is thought to be one contributor to the strong links between a lack of social ties and mortality.

One obvious question that stems from these observations is: why? Why are the same survival-related responses triggered by basic threats to survival also triggered in response to delivering a public speech? Why would the dynamics of the immune system “care about” or change in response to whether an individual feels lonely or not? In sum, why would the health of the body be sensitive to the social world?

One provocative hypothesis that may account for the body's inherent sensitivity to the social world stems from the dangers associated with being alone. Given the importance of social connection for mammalian survival, the brain may have evolved to interpret threats to social connection as basic survival threats, resulting in similar physiological stress responses. Hence, threats to social connection, such as being excluded from the social group or rejected by someone, may trigger basic SNS and HPA stress responses because of the increased risk associated with being on the outskirts of the social group. Because being disconnected from the social group makes an individual more vulnerable to attack (by predators or hostile con-specifics) and thus increases the likelihood of wounding and infection, the immune system may have evolved to anticipate situations indicative of social disconnection by increasing inflammatory activity to prepare for these situations in which wounding and infection is more likely [2,10].

This review integrates recent research from social, affective, and health neuroscience to begin to explore this hypothesis, namely that social ties may influence health, in part, through the activation of neural systems involved in detecting the presence of basic survival threats or the absence of such threats (safety) and triggering or inhibiting, respectively, health-relevant physiological responses. This article first outlines a set of neural regions involved in processing basic survival threats—stimuli associated with the possibility of physical harm or pain (e.g., predators, environmental dangers, injuries)—and eliciting downstream physiological stress responses. This article then reviews evidence showing that these same regions also respond to threats to social connection—experiences that threaten one's sense of social connection or social value (e.g., being rejected by someone, being excluded from a group, losing a loved one). This article then outlines a set of neural regions involved in processing safety—the relative absence of stimuli associated with physical harm or pain or the presence of stimuli that are protective from harm or pain—and inhibiting downstream physiological stress responses. Finally, this article summarizes preliminary research showing that these regions are also activated in response to receiving social support during times of need.

Basic threat mechanisms as a possible mediator of the link between threats to social connection and health

Neural regions involved in processing threat or harm

Research on fear and pain processing has highlighted a set of neural regions involved in detecting and responding to basic survival threats. These regions include (but are not limited to) the amygdala, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), anterior insula (AI), and periacqueductal gray (PAG) (see Figure 1a).

Figure 1
(A) Neural regions that have been shown to process threat or harm (displayed in red) include the amgydala, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC), periacqueductal gray (PAG), and anterior insula (not shown here). (B) Neural regions that have been shown ...

The amygdala, likely the most well-studied neural region in the context of threat processing, is involved in responding to basic threats, such as impending pain (e.g., shock) and dangerous stimuli (e.g., snakes, spiders, threatening faces) [1113]. The amygdala, in particular the central nucleus of the amygdala [14], also plays a critical role in both the acquisition and expression of conditioned fear, a process by which an individual learns associations that predict threatening stimuli [15,16]. Similarly, the dACC, AI, and PAG, though predominantly associated with pain processing [17] also respond to impending pain or imminent threat [12,18,19] and are reliably activated during fear conditioning paradigms [15,20,21]. Indeed, rodent studies demonstrate that the prelimbic cortex, homologous with the dACC and the nearby dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC; Brodmann area 8/9) in humans, is involved in sustaining fear responses [22,23], possibly through excitatory projections to the amygdala [21,24].

In response to detecting threat, many of these neural regions facilitate downstream physiological responses. The central nucleus of the amgydala controls the expression of fear-related changes in sympathetic and endocrine responses, through projections to the hypothalamus and brainstem areas [22,25]. Hence, stimulating the central nucleus of the amgydala increases blood pressure [26], whereas lesions to this region reduce sympathetic and endocrine response to conditioned stimuli [2730]. Likewise, electrical stimulation of the dACC increases SNS responses [21,31], whereas lesions to the dACC reduce SNS responses [32]. PAG activity can increase or decrease SNS responding depending on the type of stressor (e.g., escapable, inescapable) and the specific PAG column activated [33]. The AI, on the other hand, while often associated with SNS activity, may be more involved in representing autonomic responses in conscious awareness than in generating them [34].

Finally, emphasizing the role of these threat-related neural regions in physiological responding that has implications for health outcomes, animal studies have shown that lesions to only two neural regions—the amygdala and ACC—were found to reduce inflammatory-related gastric pathology associated with restraint stress [35]. Similarly, dACC lesions in humans have been shown to alleviate inflammatory-related gastrointestinal ulcers [35].

Neural regions involved in processing threats to social connection

Interestingly, many of the same regions that process basic survival threats also process threats to social connection. For example, experiencing an episode of social exclusion or reliving an experience of social rejection activates the dACC and AI [3639]. Similarly, threats to social connection in the form of negative social feedback activate the dACC, AI, and DMPFC [40]. In fact, simply viewing rejection-themed images increases activity in the amygdala as well as the dACC and AI, particularly for rejection-sensitive individuals [41,42]. Finally, viewing images of recently deceased loved ones activates the dACC, AI, and PAG [4345]. Thus, various experiences that threaten social connection—from rejection to bereavement—can activate these threat-related neural regions.

Importantly, activity in several of these regions appears to track the subjective experience of social disconnection. Thus, individuals who tend to feel more social distress (more rejected, disconnected) following social exclusion show greater activity in the dACC and AI [37]. Likewise, individuals who tend to feel more socially disconnected in their real-world interactions show greater activity in the dACC, amygdala, and PAG during social exclusion [46]. The finding that threat-related neural activity tracks the subjective experience of social disconnection maps nicely onto health research, which has shown that subjective assessments of social isolation (e.g., loneliness) often have stronger relationships with physiological stress responses and health outcomes than objective assessments (e.g, network size) [8,47,48]. Hence, subjective experiences of social disconnection and the underlying threat-related neural response may be critical for understanding how social experience influences health.

Neural mediators of the link between threats to social connection and physiological responses

In addition to showing that threats to social connection can activate basic threat-related neural regions, several studies have also shown that activity in the these regions correlates with physiological stress responding. For example, various types of cognitive performance tasks (e.g., mental arithmetic) that involve elements of social evaluation or threats to intellectual competence (and thus imply the possibility of negative social evaluation or social rejection) increase autonomic activation (heart rate, blood pressure). When examining neural predictors of these autonomic changes, greater activity in the dACC, AI, and in some cases, the amygdala in response to these stressors is associated with greater increases in autonomic activation (e.g., increases in blood pressure, heart rate, pupil dilation) [32,4952]. In fact, the dACC, in particular, may play a role in generating these autonomic responses to mental stressors, as patients with dACC damage show blunted autonomic responses, particularly to mental stressors [32]. Indeed, a recent study demonstrated that, in response to a social-evaluative stressor (preparing to give a public speech), greater activity in the dACC as well as the PAG was associated with greater increases in heart rate [53].

Although more is known about the neural correlates of autonomic responses to stress, studies examining the neural correlates of neuroendocrine and inflammatory responses have revealed consistent findings. Greater activity in the dACC following a mental stress task was associated with greater increases in cortisol [54], particularly for females [55]. Similarly, greater activity in the dACC and nearby DMPFC in response to social exclusion was associated with greater increases in cortisol to a similar social stressor [46]. Likewise, individuals who showed an increase in cortisol (vs. those who did not) to a social-evaluative stressor showed increased activity in the DMPFC [56]. Finally, in the one study to examine the neural correlates of inflammatory responses to social stress, greater dACC and AI activity in response to social exclusion was associated with greater inflammatory responses to a similar social stressor [57]. Thus, threats to social connection may relate to health through increased threat-related neural and physiological stress responding.

Basic safety mechanisms as a possible mediator of the link between social connection and health

Neural regions involved in processing safety

In addition to a set of neural regions involved in processing threat, the brain is also equipped with a set of neural regions that process `safety'—the relative absence (vs. presence) of threat or the presence of stimuli known to be protective from threat—and reduce threat responding to these contextual safety cues. In fact, research has highlighted the involvement of the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC), a region often associated with reward [58], and, in some cases, the posterior cingulate cortex (PCC) (see Figure 1b), in responding to cues that signal safety or the absence of negative outcomes (relative to the presence of negative outcomes) [16,22], and thus may be experienced as rewarding. For example, moving a live tarantula away from (vs. closer to) a subject's foot was associated with increased activity in the VMPFC and PCC [12]. Similarly, learning that a cue that previously predicted a negative outcome (e.g., shock) now predicts safety (e.g., no shock), a process called fear extinction or learned safety, also activates these regions [15,21,22].

In addition to detecting conditions of increasing safety, the VMPFC also plays a role in inhibiting threat-related behavioral and physiological responding [22]. In animals, the infralimbic cortex—homologous to VMPFC (BA 11) and nearby subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (subACC; Brodmann area 25) in humans—is critical for detecting safety and reducing fear responding through inhibitory connections with the amygdala [16]. As such, stimulating the infralimbic cortex in rats inhibits the central nucleus of the amygdala [59] and diminishes fear responding to fear cues [60].

Similarly, human neuroimaging studies have shown that greater activity in these regions is associated with reductions in threat-related physiological responding. Greater VMPFC activity during fear extinction (safety learning) is associated with reduced SNS activity [15,22]. Greater VMPFC and PCC activity during mental or social stress is associated with reduced cardiovascular responding [34,50,53,61] as well as reduced threat-related neural activity (dACC, PAG) [53]. Finally, greater activity in these regions is also associated with reduced cortisol responses to social stress [46,62], and damage to the VMPFC increases feelings of threat and cortisol responses (in females) in response to social stress [63]. Finally, as evidence for a causal role for these regions in inhibiting threat-related disease outcomes, lesioning either the VMPFC or PCC in animals leads to increases in inflammatory-related gastric pathology [35].

Interestingly, consistent with the hypothesis that these regions may reduce threat-responding, possibly to promote rest and restoration in response to safety, a recent meta-analysis showed that the VMPFC/subACC is associated with parasympathetic nervous system activity [64], a component of the autonomic nervous system involved in reducing physiological arousal and promoting vegetative activities that occur when the body is at rest (digestion, growth). Thus, activity in these safety-related regions may be involved in promoting parasympathetic and inhibiting sympathetic responses, which may ultimately be health-protective.

Neural regions involved in processing social connection or social support

Although research on the neural underpinnings of social connection and social support is still in its infancy, some work is beginning to show that some of the same neural regions that detect safety and reduce threat are also involved in responding to the presence of a social support figure during stress. For example, two studies have shown that seeing a picture of a highly supportive relationship partner while experiencing physical pain leads to increased activity in the VMPFC and/or PCC as well as decreased activity in the dACC and insula [65,66]. Moreover, consistent with the role of the VMPFC in reducing threat-related responding, both studies demonstrated that greater activity in the VMPFC was associated with reductions in self-reported pain [65,66], and in one study, greater VMPFC activity was associated with reduced pain-related neural activity in the dACC [65].

Similar results were observed in a study examining social support during a negative social experience. Being provided with socially supportive messages while experiencing social exclusion (vs. social inclusion) led to increased activity in the VMPFC and PCC and reduced activity in the insula [67]. Along these lines, thinking about close others vs. strangers, though not during a negative experience, also activates the VMPFC and PCC [68,69]. Still, some studies showed that social support reduced activity in certain threat-related neural regions but did not increase activity in other regions [70,71]. In addition, studies examining how general perceptions of social support (e.g., tendency to interact with supportive others) relate to neural responses to threatening events show reduced activity in threat-related neural regions but no increased activity in other regions [46,72,73]. Thus, additional work will be needed to better understand the neural underpinnings associated with the threat-reducing effects of social support. Future work will also be needed to examine whether the presence of social support attenuates health-relevant physiological responding through these safety-related neural regions.

Conclusions and Future Directions

In sum, research is beginning to highlight some of the ways in which social experience relates to health by examining the neural mechanisms that translate social connection or a lack thereof into health-relevant physiological responses. This review outlined threat- and safety-related neural regions and demonstrated that these same regions are responsive to the absence or presence of social connection, respectively. Together, these findings underscore the importance of social ties for human survival and highlight the trickle-down effect that this importance may have on our physical health. Specifically, to the extent that lacking social ties increases the risk of wounding and infection, the brain may have evolved to respond psychologically and physiologically to these risky social situations as though they were immediate threats to survival. In contrast, experiences of social connection or social support may serve to quiet these same physiological stress responses through the activation of neural regions that detect safety and inhibit physiological stress responses when they are not needed. Over time, chronic experiences of social disconnection or connection may change the body—by up-or down-regulating inflammatory dynamics in order to prepare the body for these social situations in which survival is threatened or benefited, respectively.

Although research on the neural mechanisms linking social experience with health is beginning to grow, there are many questions that remain to be answered within this emerging field. First, in addition to understanding the basic neural regions that facilitate or inhibit physiological stress responses (SNS, HPA) in response to discrete social events, it will also be important to understand how chronic forms of social experience may alter these neural and physiological responses over time. Thus, most health-related work has focused on chronic social experiences (e.g., loneliness, having social ties) that predict health-relevant outcomes or mortality [8,47]. It will be important for neuroimaging research, which is adept at identifying neural responses to acute social experience, to begin to assess how chronic or repeated exposure to social experiences affects neural and physiological responding over time. In addition, though not yet widely used, higher-resolution neuroimaging techniques will be necessary to effectively chart out pathways from higher-level neural regions involved in appraising social connection with lower-level neural regions that mediate SNS and HPA responding. Finally, it will be important to better understand whether these same neural regions, critical for physical health, relate to mental health as well. Given the importance of social connection for survival, it seems likely that these same neural regions that process the absence or presence of social connection would also be critically involved in various forms of psychiatric illness. For example, psychiatric disorders that involve social deficits may be most closely linked to altered activity in these regions and may stem, in part, from exaggerated neural responsivity to threats to social connection (e.g., social anxiety, depression), diminished neural responsivity to threats to social connection (e.g., psychopathy, autism), or diminished neural responsivity to social support and safety (e.g., borderline personality disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder). Social neuroscience may provide a critical platform for further understanding the complex relationships between the brain and both physical and mental health.


  1. Considerable research has shown strong relationships between social ties and health.
  2. Neural regions that process basic survival threats facilitate health-relevant physiological stress responses.
  3. Threats to social connection activate neural regions that process survival threats and elicit physiological stress responses.
  4. Neural regions that process safety signals inhibit health-relevant physiological stress responses.
  5. Having social support activates neural regions that process safety signals and inhibit physiological stress responses.


Thanks to the members of the Social and Affective Neuroscience lab for the discussion of many of the ideas presented here and to support from a NARSAD Young Investigator Award and a grant from the National Institutes of Mental Health (NIMH R01MH091352).


Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final citable form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References and recommended readings

Papers of particular interest, published within the period of review, have been highlighted as:

* of special interest

** of outstanding interest

1. Grebe KM, Takeda K, Hickman HD, Bailey AM, Embry AC, Bennick JR, Yewdell JW. Cutting edge: Sympathetic nervous system increases proinflammatory cytokines and exacerbates influenza a virus pathogenesis. J Immon. 2009;184:540–544. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
2. Irwin MR, Cole SW. Reciprocal regulation of the neural and innate immune systems. Nat Rev Immunol. 2011;11:625–632. [PMC free article] [PubMed]*This paper provides a nice review of the birectional relationships between neural and inflammatory processes.
3. Miller G, Chen E, Cole SW. Health psychology: Developing biologically plausible models linking the social world and physical health. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:5.1–5.24. [PubMed]
4. Finch CE. The biology of human longevity: Inflammation, nutrition, and aging in the evolution of life spans. Academic Press; Boston, MA: 2007.
5. Kirschbaum C, Pirke KM, Hellhammer DH. The `Trier Social Stress Test'—a tool for investigating psychobiological stress responses in a laboratory setting. Neuropsychobiology. 1993;28:76–81. [PubMed]
6. Dickerson SS, Gable SL, Irwin MR, Aziz N, Kemeny ME. Social-evaluative threat and proinflammatory cytokine regulation: An experimental laboratory investigation. Psychol Sci. 2009;20:1237–1244. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
7. Bosch JA, de Gaus EJ, Carroll D, Goedhart AD, Anane LA, van Zaten JJ, et al. A general enhancement of autonomic and cortisol responses during social evaluative threat. Psychosom Med. 2009;71:877–885. [PubMed]
8. Cole SW, Hawkley LC, Arevalo JM, Sung CY, Rose RM, Cacioppo JT. Social regulation of gene expression in human leukocytes. Genome Biol. 2007;8:R189. [PMC free article] [PubMed]**This paper was the first to show that a social factor—loneliness—was associated with alterations in genome-wide transcriptional activity. Specifically, the authors demonstrated that lonely, relative to non-lonely individuals, showed increased activity of proinflammatory transcription control pathways and impaired transcription of glucocorticoid response genes.
9. Miller G, Chen E, Cole SW. Health psychology: Developing biologically plausible models linking the social world and physical health. Annu Rev Psychol. 2009;60:5.1–5.24. [PubMed]
10. Eisenberger NI, Cole SW. Social neuroscience and health: Neurophysiological mechanisms linking social ties with physical health. Nat Neurosci. 2012;15:669–674. [PubMed]
11. Mobbs D, Petrovic P, Marchant JL, Hassabis D, Weiskopf N, Seymour B, et al. When fear is near: Threat imminence elicits prefrontal-periaqueductal gray shifts in humans. Science. 2007;317:1079–1083. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
12. Mobbs D, Yu R, Rowe JB, Eich H, FeldmanHall O, Dalgeish T. Neural activity associated with monitoring the oscillating threat value of a tarantula. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2010;23:20582–20586. [PubMed]**This paper nicely highlights the neural regions involved in perceptions of threat and safety by exposing subjects to a tarantula and varying the distance between the subject and the tarantula.
13. Phelps EA. Emotion and cognition: Insights from studies of the human amygdala. Annu Rev Psychol. 2006;57:27–53. [PubMed]
14. Ciocchi S, Herry C, Grenier F, Wolff SBE, Letzkus JJ, Vlachos I, et al. Encoding of conditioned fear in central amygdala inhibitory circuits. Nature. 2010;468:277–282. [PubMed]*This paper uses an optogenetic approach to more precisely characterize the role of specific amygdala subnuclei in fear conditioning and fear expression.
15. Phelps EA, Delgado MR, Nearing KI, LeDoux JE. Extinction learning in humans: Role of the amygdala and vmPFC. Neuron. 2004;43:897–905. [PubMed]
16. Delgado MR, Olsson A, Phelps EA. Extending animal models of fear conditioning to humans. Biol Psychol. 2006;73:39–48. [PubMed]
17. Rainville P. Brain mechanisms of pain affect and pain modulation. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2002;12:195–204. [PubMed]
18. Mobbs D, Marchant JL, Hassabis D, Seymour B, Tan G, Gray M, et al. From threat to fear: The neural organization of defensive fear systems in humans. J Neurosci. 2009;29:12236–12243. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
19. Nili U, Goldberg H, Weizman A, Dudai Y. Fear thou not: Activity of frontal and temporal circuits in moments of real-life courage. Neuron. 2010;66:949–962. [PubMed]
20. Büchel C, Dolan RJ. Classical fear conditioning in functional neuroimaging. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2000;10:219–223. [PubMed]
21. Milad MR, Quirk GJ, Pitman RK, Orr SP, Fischi B, Rauch SL. A role for the human dorsal anterior cingulate cortex in fear expression. Biol Psychiatry. 2007;62:1191–1194. [PubMed]
22. Schiller D, Delgado MR. Overlapping neural systems mediating extinction, reversal, and regulation of fear. Trends Cogn Sci. 2010;14:268–276. [PMC free article] [PubMed]*This paper provides a nice review of the neural regions responsive to threat and safety, from the lens of fear conditioning research.
23. Burgos-Robles A, Vidal-Gonzalez I, Quirk GJ. Sustained conditioned responses in prelimbic prefrontal neurons are correlated with fear expression and extinction failure. J Neurosci. 2009;29:8474–8482. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
24. Brinley-Reed M, Mascagni F, McDonald AJ. Synaptology of prefrontal cortical projections to the basolateral amygdala: an electron microscopic study in the rat. Neurosci Letters. 1995;202:45–48. [PubMed]
25. LeDoux JE. Emotion circuits in the brain. Ann Rev Neurosci. 2000;23:155–184. [PubMed]
26. Tellioğlu T, Aker R, Oktay S, Onat F. Effect of brain acetylcholine depletion on bicuculline-induced cardiovascular and locomotor reponses. International J Neurosci. 1997;89:143–152. [PubMed]
27. Kalin NH, Shelton SE, Davidson RJ. The role of the central nucleus of the amygdala in mediating fear and anxiety in the primate. J Neurosci. 2004;24:5506–5515. [PubMed]
28. Kapp BS, Frysinger RC, Gallagher M, Haselton JR. Amygdala centrl nucleus lesions: effect on heart rate conditioning in the rabbit. Phys & Behav. 1979;23:1109–1117. [PubMed]
29. McCabe PM, Gentile CG, Markgraf CG, Teich AH, Schneiderman N. Ibotenic acid lesions in the amygdaloid central nucleus but not in the lateral subthalamic area prevent the acquisition of differential Pavlovian conditioning of bradycardia in rabbits. Brain Res. 1992;580:155–163. [PubMed]
30. Bechara A, Tranel D, Damasio H, Adolphs R, Rockland C, Damasio AR. Double dissociation of conditioning and declarative knowledge relative to the amygdala and hippocampus in humans. Science. 1995;269:1115–1118. [PubMed]
31. Mangina CA, Beuzeron-Mangina JH. Direct electrical stimulation of specific human bain structures and bilateral electrodermal activity. Int J Physchophysiol. 1996;22:1–8. [PubMed]
32. Critchley HD, Mathias CJ, Josephs O, O'Doherty J, Zanini S, Dewar B-K, et al. Human cingulate cortex and autonomic control: Converging neuroimaging and clinical evidence. Brain. 2003;126:2139–2152. [PubMed]
33. Bandler R, Keay KA, Floyd N, Price J. Central circuits patterned autonomic activity during active vs. passive emotional coping. Brain Res Bulletin. 2000;53:95–104. [PubMed]
34. Critchley HD. Neural mechanisms of autonomic, affective and cognitive interpretation. J Comp Neurol. 2005;493:154–166. [PubMed]**This paper provides a nice review of neural regions that regulate autonomic and affective responses.
35. Henke PG. The telencephalic limbic system and experimental gastric pathology: A review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 1982;6:381–390. [PubMed]
36. Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD, Williams KD. Does rejection hurt? An fMRI study of social exclusion. Science. 2003;302:290–292. [PubMed]
37. Eisenberger NI. The pain of social disconnection: examining the shared neural underpinnings of physical and social pain. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13:421–434. [PubMed]**This paper provides a systematic review of the literature on the neural underpinnings of social pain, the painful feelings following social rejection, exclusion, or loss.
38. Fisher HE, Brown LL, Aron A, Strong G, Mashek D. Reward, addiction, and emotion regulation systems associated with rejection in love. J Neurophys. 2010;104:51–60. [PubMed]
39. Kross E, Berman MG, Mischel W, Smith EE, Wager TD. Social rejection shares somatosensory representation with physical pain. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:6270–6275. [PubMed]
40. Eisenberger NI, Inagaki TK, Muscatell KA, Haltom KEB, Leary MR. The neural sociometer: Brain mechanisms underlying state self-esteem. J Cogn Neurosci. 2011;23:3448–3455. [PubMed]
41. Kross E, Egner T, Ochsner K, Hirsch J, Downey G. Neural dynamics of rejection sensitivity. J Cog Neuro. 2007;19:945–956. [PubMed]
42. Burklund LJ, Eisenberger NI, Lieberman MD. The face of rejection: Rejection sensitivity moderates dorsal anterior cingulate activity to disapproving facial expressions. Soc Neuro. 2007;2:238–253. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
43. Gündel H, Wolf A, Xidara V, Busch R, Ladwig K-H, Jacobi F, et al. High psychiatric comorbidity in spasmodic torticollis: A controlled study. J Nervous and Mental Disease. 2003;191:465–473. [PubMed]
44. O'Connor M-F, Wellisch DK, Stanton AL, Eisenberger NI, Irwin MR, Lieberman MD. Craving love? Enduring grief activates brain's reward center. NeuroImage. 2008;42:969–972. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
45. Kersting A, Ohrmann P, Pedersen A, Kroker K, Samberg D, Bauer J, et al. Neural activation underlying acute grief in women after the loss of an unborn child. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166:1402–1410. [PubMed]
46. Eisenberger NI, Taylor SE, Gable SL, Hilmert CJ, Lieberman MD. Neural pathways link social support to attenuated neuroendocrine stress responses. NeuroImage. 2007;35:1601–1612. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
47. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TB, Layton JB. Social relationship and mortality risk: a meta-analytical review. PLoS Med. 2010;7:e1000316. [PMC free article] [PubMed]**This paper is a comprehensive meta-analysis of 148 studies showing that social relationships are a strong predictor of risk for mortality.
48. Cacioppo JT, Hawkley LC. Perceived social isolation and cognition. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009;13:447–454. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
49. Critchley HD, Corfield DR, Chandler MP, Mathias CJ, Dolan RJ. Cerebral correlates of autonomic cardiovascular arousal: A functional neuroimaging investigation in humans. J Physiol. 2000;5I:259–270. [PubMed]
50. Gianaros PJ, van der Veen FM, Jennings JR. Regional cerebral blood flow correlates with heart period and high-frequency heart period variability during working-memory tasks: Implications for the cortical and subcortical regulation of cardiac autonomic activity. Psychophysiol. 2004;41:521–530. [PubMed]
51. Gianaros PJ, Derbyshire SWG, May JC, Siegle GJ, Gamalo MA, Jennings JR. Anterior cingulate activity correlates with blood pressure during stress. Psychophysiology. 2005;42:627–635. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
52. Gianaros PJ, Onywuenyi IC, Sheu LK, Christie IC, Critchley HD. Brain systems for baroreflex suppression during stress in humans. Hum Brain Mapp. 2011;33:1700–1716. [PubMed]
53. Wager TD, van Ast VA, Hughes BL, Davidson ML, Lindquist MA, Ochsner KN. Brain mediators of cardiovascular responses to social threat, Part II: Prefrontal-subcortical pathways and relationship with anxiety. NeuroImage. 2009;47:836–851. [PubMed]**The authors of this paper used sophisticated data analysis techniques to model how fluctuations in cardiovascular responses to a social stressor map onto fluctuations in neural activity.
54. Wang J, Rao H, Wetmore GS, Furlan PM, Korczykowski M, Dinges DF, Detre JA. Prefusion functional functional MRI reveals cerebral bood flow pattern under psychological stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005;102:17804–17809. [PubMed]
55. Wang J, Korczkowski M, Rao H, Fan Y, Pluta J, Gur RC, McEwen BS, Detre JA. Gender difference in neural response to psychological stress. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2007;2:227–239. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
56. Dedovic K, Rexroth M, Wolff E, Duchesne A, Scherling C, Beaudry T, et al. Neural correlates of processing stressful information: An event-related fMRI study. Brain Research. 2009;1293:49–60. [PubMed]
57. Slavich GM, Way BM, Eisenberger NI, Taylor SE. Neural sensitivity to social rejection is associated with inflammatory responses to social stress. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010;107:14817–14822. [PubMed]*This is one of the only studies to examine how neural responses to social stress relate to inflammatory responses to social stress to better understand the brain-body pathways that link negative social experience with immune system changes.
58. O'Doherty JP. Reward representations and reward-related learning in the human brain: Insights from neuroimaging. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 2004;14:769–776. [PubMed]
59. Quirk GJ, Likhtik E, Pelletier JG, Paré D. Stimulation of medial prefrontal cortex decreases the responsiveness of central amygdala output neurons. J Neurosci. 2003;23:8800–8807. [PubMed]
60. Milad MR, Quirk GJ. Neurons in medial prefrontal cortex signal memory for fear extinction. Nature. 2002;420:70–74. [PubMed]
61. Wager TD, Waugh CE, Lindquist M, Noll DC, Fredrickson BL, Taylor SF. Brain mediators of cardiovascular responses to social threat: part I: Reciprocal dorsal and ventral sub-regions of the medial prefrontal cortex and heart-rate reactivity. NeuroImage. 2009;47:821–835. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
62. Pruessner JC, Dedovic K, Khalili-Mahani N, Engert V, Pruessner M, Buss C, et al. Deactivation of the limbic system during acute psychosocial stress: Evidence from positron emission tomography and functional magnetic resonance imaging. Biol Psychiatry. 2008;63:234–240. [PubMed]
63. Buchanan TW, Driscoll D, Mowrer SM, Sollers JJ, III, Thayer JF, Kirschbaum C, et al. Medial prefrontal cortex damage affects physiological and psychological stress responses differently in men and women. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 2010;35:56–66. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
64. Thayer JF, Ahs F, Fredrikson M, Sollers JJ, III, Wager TD. A meta-analysis of heart rate variability and neuroimaging studies: Implications for heart rate variability as a marker of stress and health. Neurosci Biobehav Rev. 2012;36:747–756. [PubMed]
65. Eisenberger NI, Master SL, Inagaki TI, Taylor SE, Shirinyan D, Lieberman MD, Naliboff B. Attachment figures activate a safety signal-related neural region and reduce pain experience. Proc Nat Acad Sci USA. 2011;108:11721–11726. [PubMed]*This is one of the few studies to examine the neural circuitry associated with receiving social support during a negative experience and posits that basic systems involved in processing safety stimuli may be involved.
66. Younger J, Aron A, Parke S, Chatterjee N, Mackey S. Viewing pictures of a romantic partner reduces experimental pain: Involvement of neural reward systems. PLoS ONE. 2010;5:e133309. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
67. Onoda K, Okamoto Y, Nakashima K, Nittono H, Ura M, Yamawaki S. Decreased ventral anterior cingulate cortex activity is associated with reduced social pain during emotional support. Soc Neurosci. 2009;4:443–454. [PubMed]
68. Maddock RJ, Garrett AS, Buonocore MH. Remembering familiar people: The posterior cingulate cortex and autobiographical memory retrieval. Neuroscience. 2001;104:667–676. [PubMed]
69. Krienen FM, Tu P-C, Buckner RL. Clan mentality: Evidence that the medial cortex responds to close others. J Neurosci. 2010;30:13906–13915. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
70. Coan JA, Schaefer HS, Davidson RJ. Lending a hand: Social Regulation of the neural response to threat. Psychol Sci. 2006;17:1032–1039. [PubMed]
71. Karremans JC, Heslenfeld DJ, van Dillen LF, Van Lange PAM. Secure attachment partners attenuate neural responses to social exclusion: An fMRI investigation. Int J Psychophysiol. 2011;81:44–50. [PubMed]
72. Masten CL, Telzer EH, Fuligni A, Lieberman MD, Eisenberger NI. Time spent with friends in adolescence relates to less neural sensitivity to later peer rejection. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012;7:106–114. [PMC free article] [PubMed]
73. DeWall CN, Masten CL, Powell C, Combs D, Schurtz DR, Eisenberger NI. Do neural responses to rejection depend on attachment style? An fMRI study. Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci. 2012;7:184–192. [PMC free article] [PubMed]