Next Article in Journal
A Novel Connectome-based Electrophysiological Study of Subjective Cognitive Decline Related to Alzheimer’s Disease by Using Resting-state High-density EEG EGI GES 300
Next Article in Special Issue
Understanding Different Aspects of Caregiving for Individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASDs) a Narrative Review of the Literature
Previous Article in Journal
Lacking Pace but Not Precision: Age-Related Information Processing Changes in Response to a Dynamic Attentional Control Task
Previous Article in Special Issue
Promoting the Social Inclusion of Children with ASD: A Family-Centred Intervention
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Brain Sciences
Volume 10
Issue 6
10.3390/brainsci10060391
brainsci-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Reward Responsiveness in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study: African Americans’ Diminished Returns of Parental Education

by
Shervin Assari
1,*,
Shanika Boyce
2,
Golnoush Akhlaghipour
3,
Mohsen Bazargan
1,4 and
Cleopatra H. Caldwell
5,6
1
Department of Family Medicine, Charles R Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA 90059, USA
2
Department of Pediatrics, Charles R Drew University of Medicine and Science, Los Angeles, CA 90059, USA
3
Department of Neurology, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
4
Department of Family Medicine, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA 90095, USA
5
Center for Research on Ethnicity, Culture, and Health (CRECH), School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA
6
Department of Health Behavior and Health Education, School of Public Health, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48104, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Brain Sci. 2020, 10(6), 391; https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060391
Submission received: 22 May 2020 / Revised: 16 June 2020 / Accepted: 16 June 2020 / Published: 19 June 2020
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Connections between Parental Involvement and Treatment of Children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD))
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
(1) Background: Reward responsiveness (RR) is a risk factor for high-risk behaviors such as aggressive behaviors and early sexual initiation, which are all reported to be higher in African American and low socioeconomic status adolescents. At the same time, parental education is one of the main drivers of reward responsiveness among adolescents. It is still unknown if some of this racial and economic gap is attributed to weaker effects of parental education for African Americans, a pattern also called minorities’ diminished returns (MDRs). (2) Aim: We compared non-Hispanic White and African American adolescents for the effects of parent education on adolescents RR, a psychological and cognitive construct that is closely associated with high-risk behaviors such as the use of drugs, alcohol, and tobacco. (3) Methods: This was a cross-sectional analysis that included 7072 adolescents from the adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study. The independent variable was parent education. The main outcome as adolescents’ RR measured by the behavioral inhibition system (BIS) and behavioral activation system (BAS) measure. (4) Results: In the overall sample, high parent education was associated with lower levels of RR. In the overall sample, we found a statistically significant interaction between race and parent education on adolescents’ RR. The observed statistical interaction term suggested that high parent education is associated with a weaker effect on RR for African American than non-Hispanic White adolescents. In race-stratified models, high parent education was only associated with lower RR for non-Hispanic White but not African American adolescents. (5) Conclusion: Parent education reduces RR for non-Hispanic White but not African American adolescents. To minimize the racial gap in brain development and risk-taking behaviors, we need to address societal barriers that diminish the returns of parent education and resources in African American families. We need public and social policies that target structural and societal barriers, such as the unequal distribution of opportunities and resources. To meet such an aim, we need to reduce the negative effects of social stratification, segregation, racism, and discrimination in the daily lives of African American parents and families. Through an approach like this, African American families and parents can effectively mobilize their resources and utilize their human capital to secure the best possible tangible outcomes for their adolescents.

1. Introduction

Reward responsiveness (RR) [1], a trait closely linked to impulsivity and risk taking [2], is a major driver of high-risk behaviors such as tobacco use [3,4,5,6,7,8], alcohol use [9,10,11,12], emotional eating [13], obesity [14], aggression [15], and sexual risk [16,17]. High RR is also associated with a wide range of psychiatric disorders such as depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) [18]. Similar to the evidence that high-risk behaviors [19] and impulsivity [20,21] may be linked to race and socioeconomic status (SES), youth and adults with African American and low SES backgrounds may report higher RR than individuals from non-Hispanic White and high SES backgrounds [22].
Based on Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) [23], RR is one of the two neurobiological bases that guide human’s emotions, motivations, and behaviors. Rooted in the behavioral approach system (BAS) developed by the Carver and White [14], high RR reflects individuals’ high sensitivity to conditioned cues, which signal them about a higher-than-luck probability of reward. Individuals with a high score on the RR trait are more likely to act on any cues that may generate internal or external reward. In the recent version of the same theory [24], Gray and McNaughton have discussed BAS-based RR as well as approach-related behaviors and stimuli that contribute to human decisions, choices, and behaviors. Many investigators have found evidence linking the RR trait to a wide range of health and behavioral outcomes in clinical [22,25,26] as well as community [27] samples. RR is also highly relevant to adolescents’ behaviors and risk- taking [9,13,28].
Relative to their non-Hispanic White counterparts, African American adolescents are at an increased risk of high-risk behaviors. For example, African American adolescents are more likely than non-Hispanic White adolescents to be at risk of aggression [29], early sexual debut [30], and poor school performance [31]. As these early risk taking behaviors operate as a barrier against positive and desired health and economic outcomes later in life [32,33,34,35], it is essential to study environmental and psychological factors that explain high RR (and associated risky behaviors) of African American adolescents. Such knowledge may inform public and social policies as well as interventions that can be implemented during adolescence to eliminate later racial inequalities [32,33,34,35].
Given the close overlap between race and parental education in the US [36], researchers have shown immense interest in understanding the combined effects of race and parental education on adolescents’ inequalities [37,38,39]. As both racial minority status and low parental education reflect food and housing insecurity, economic adversities, stress, and financial difficulties [40,41,42,43], some of the effects of race may be in fact due to low parental education in African American families. Thus, low parental education may carry some of the effects of race on adolescents’ outcomes [36]. Recent data, however, show that the effects of race and parental education are more complex as they show both mediation and moderation effects on health inequalities [44,45,46,47]. While parental education is also a proxy of access to risk and protective factors [44,45,46,47], the protective effects of parental education seem to be weaker for African American than non-Hispanic White adolescents.
There are at least two complementary theories that provide an explanation for how race and parental education jointly impact adolescents’ outcomes. The first theory, dominant in the literature, and more commonly used as an explanation of the inequalities, attributes the observed racial gap in adolescents’ outcomes to the observed differences in parental education and other family SES indicators across racial groups [36,48,49,50]. In a statistical term, this theory conceptualizes parental education as the mediator (why) for racial differences in adolescents’ outcomes [51,52,53]. If this theory is followed, then the strategic goal for closing the racial gap in adolescents’ health would be to close the racial gap in family SES. Some example policy modalities in line with this strategy include income redistribution policies, minimum wage policies, or an earned income tax credit that help racial minorities to earn higher income and accumulate more wealth [54,55].
Minorities’ diminished returns (MDRs) [56,57], the second theory, however, argues that the effects of parental education and other family SES indicators tend to be weaker for racial minority groups such as African Americans, when compared to non-Hispanic Whites. This line of view is not against the traditional mediational model but provides an additional explanation for why, despite years of investment and the decline in the gap between races in terms of family SES, the racial and economic health gaps are still sustained and in some cases, widened [58,59,60,61,62]. The MDRs theory has been supported by a large number of papers showing that parental education [63], family income [64,65], and marital status [66] generate less health and well-being for African American than non-Hispanic White adolescents. This literature is repeatedly shown for emotional and behavioral outcomes [63,64,65,67,68]. For example, high family SES showed a smaller effect as a preventive factor on impulsivity [64], depression [67], anxiety [69], aggression [63], low grade point average (GPA) [63,70,71], and substance use [63] for African American than non-Hispanic White adolescents. Similarly, high SES African American youth are found to be at high risk of attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD) [72] and obesity [73]. Given the existing MDRs, it would be too optimistic and unrealistic to expect racial inequities to disappear even if we could fully eliminate SES inequalities. In this view, SES indicators such as parental education are seen as both a remedy and also a source of inequalities across racial groups. While it is essential to eliminate the SES gap, we should complement our policy responses in a specific way that particularly empowers African American families to mobilize their resources and secure better health outcomes [56,57].
As described above, the MDR literature suggests that the educational attainment of oneself [74] and one’s parents [75,76,77] generate fewer tangible outcomes for racial minorities such as African Americans. This might be because African Americans and non-Hispanic Whites differ in getting chances and opportunities to mobilize their education and secure high paying jobs in the presence of high education [57,64,69,76,78,79]. As a result of these MDRs of parental education, compared to their non-Hispanic White counterparts, African American adolescents with highly educated parents show worse than expected outcomes that are disproportionate to their family SES [56,57,64,65,68]. Although these findings may be similar to what may be expected due regression to the mean, in a recent paper, we published and showed that MDRs are not due to such a superfluous association [80].

Aims

To extend the science on what we already know about the role of RR as a mechanism for explaining MDRs for high-risk behaviors such as aggression, tobacco use, and impulsivity, in this study, we explored the combined effects of race and parent education on adolescents’ RR. Thus, we compared African American and non-Hispanic White adolescents for the effect of parent education, a strong family SES determinant of adolescents’ various behaviors, and RR. We expected a weaker effect of parent education on RR for African American than non-Hispanic White adolescents.

2. Methods

2.1. Design and Settings

We performed a secondary analysis of data from the adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study [81,82,83,84,85], a landmark adolescents brain development study in the United States. Detailed information on the ABCD study is available elsewhere [81,86].

2.2. Participants and Sampling

Participants of the ABCD study were adolescents ages 9–10 years old. Adolescents in the ABCD study were recruited from multiple cities across states. Overall, there were 21 sites that recruited adolescents to the ABCD study. The recruitment of the ABCD sample was mainly done through school systems. A detailed description of the ABCD sampling is available here [87]. Four thousand one hundred eighty-eight participants entered our analysis. Eligibility for our analysis had valid data on race, parental education, marital status, RR, and being African American or non-Hispanic White. The analytical sample of this paper consisted of 7072 participants.

2.3. Study Variables

The study variables included race, demographic factors, parent education, parental marital status, and RR.

2.4. Outcome

Reward responsiveness (RR). In this study, RR was measured using the behavioral approach system (BAS) [1] developed by the Carver and White [14]. They define RR as a trait closely linked to impulsivity and risk taking [2], with a significant relevance to high-risk behaviors such as tobacco use [3,4,5,6,7,8], alcohol use [9,10,11,12], emotional eating [13], obesity [14], aggression [15], and sexual risk [16,17]. Based on Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) [23], a high score on the RR trait reflects individuals’ high sensitivity to conditioned cues, which signal the individual about a higher-than-luck probability of reward. We operationalized a BAS-based RR score, which was a continuous measure. Although BAS had other measures such as drive and fun seeking, we only used RR. This was because we built this study to examine effects on RR, not all BAS measures.

2.4.1. Moderator: Race

Race was self-identified. Race was a categorical variable and coded 1 for African Americans and 0 for non-Hispanic Whites (reference category). All people of a Hispanic background were excluded. We used the one drop rule to handle people who identified as both White and African American. That means individuals would be considered African American if they identify as both African American and White.

2.4.2. Independent Variable: Parent Education

Participants were asked, “What is the highest grade or level of school you have completed or the highest degree you have received?”. Responses were 0 = never attended/kindergarten only; 1 = 1st grade; 2 = 2nd grade; 3 = 3rd grade; 4 = 4th grade 4; 5 = 5th grade; 6 = 6th grade 6; 7 = 7th grade 7; 8 = 8th grade; 9 = 9th grade; 10 = 10th grade 10; 11 = 11th grade; 12 = 12th grade; 13 = high school graduate; 14 = GED or equivalent diploma; 15 = some college; 16 = associate degree: occupational; 17 = associate degree: academic program; 18 = Bachelor’s degree (ex. BA); 19 = Master’s degree (ex. MA); 20 = professional school degree (ex. MD); and 21 = Doctoral degree. This variable was coded in two distinct ways. First, it was coded as measured. This was an interval measure with a range between 1 and 21. Second, we adopted the Jaeger [88] coding approach with a range from 31 to 46. For both variables, a higher score indicated higher educational attainment.

2.4.3. Confounders: Demographic Factors

Age, sex, parental marital status, and household size were the confounders. Parents reported the age of their adolescents. Age (years) was calculated as the difference between the date of birth to the date of the enrollment to the study. Sex was a dichotomous variable: males = 1, females = 0. Parental marital status was a dichotomous variable. This variable was self-reported by the parent who was interviewed. This variable was coded as married = 1 vs. other = 0. Household size, reported by the parent, was a continuous measure.

2.5. Data Analysis

We used the statistical package SPSS to perform our data analysis. Mean (standard deviation (SD)) and frequency (%) were described depending on the variable type. We also performed a Chi square and independent sample t test to test bivariate associations between race and study variables. For our multivariable modeling, we performed four linear regression models. Our first two models were performed in the overall sample. Model 3 was performed without the interaction terms. Model 4 added an interaction term between race and parental education attainment. Then we performed two additional models specifically to race (race-stratified models). Model 3 was tested in non-Hispanic White and Model 4 was tested in African American adolescents. Our models used age, sex, marital status, and household size as the covariates. We ran identical models using various coding of educational variable. Our first model used the census and our second variable used the Jaeger [88] code of educational attainment. Unstandardized regression coefficient (b), standardized regression coefficient, SE, 95% CI, t value, and p value were reported for each model. p value equal or less 0.05 were statistically significant.

2.6. Ethical Aspect

The ABCD study received an Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). Each adolescent provided assent. Each parent signed an informed consent [86]. As this analysis was performed on fully de-identified data, the study was found to be non-human subject research. Thus, our analysis was exempt from a full IRB review.

3. Results

3.1. Descriptives

As shown in Table 1, 7072, 8–11-year-old adolescents entered to this analysis. From this number, most were non-Hispanic Whites (n = 5099; 72.1%) and the rest were African Americans (n = 1973; 27.9%). Table 1 presents a summary of the descriptive statistics for the pooled sample.

3.2. Multivariate Analysis (Pooled Sample)

Table 2 shows the results of two linear regression models in the overall (pooled) sample. Model 1 (the main effect model) showed a protective effect of high parent education against RR. Model 2 (the interaction model) showed a statistically significant interaction between race and parent education on RR, which was suggestive of a weaker protective effect of high parent education on RR for African American adolescents relative to non-Hispanic White adolescents.

3.3. Multivariate Analysis (Race-Stratified Models)

Table 3 shows the results of two linear regression models in racial groups. Model 3 (non-Hispanic Whites) showed protective effects of high parent education on RR of non-Hispanic White adolescents. Model 4 (African Americans) did not show any protective effects of high parent education on RR for African American adolescents.

4. Discussion

In this study, while high parent education was associated with lower RR overall, this was only true for non-Hispanic White but not African American adolescents, as shown by the pooled sample as well as by race-stratified models. This suggests racial minority status limits the boosting effect of parent education on RR for American adolescents.
The observed diminished returns of parental education on RR is very similar to the previous publications on the MDRs of parental education and income on impulsivity [64], ADHD [72], and inhibitory control [89], social problems, emotional problems, behavioral problems [90], anxiety [69], depression [67], aggression [63], GPA [63,70,71], and substance use [63]. These are all examples of diminishing returns of parental education for African American youth when compared with non-Hispanic White youth [74,78,91,92].
MDRs are not specific to a specific resource or age group, outcome, or even marginalizing identities [56,57]. Education [74], income [64], employment [93], and marital status [69] show weaker effects on adolescents [64,65,68], adults [78], and older adults [94] who are African Americans [65], Hispanics [74,95,96,97], Asian Americans [98], Native Americans [99], lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) [91], immigrants [100], or even marginalized non-Hispanic Whites [101].
Various sociological, economic, and behavioral mechanisms are involved in explaining the MDRs of parent education for African American families. African American parents and families experience high levels of economic, social, general, and race-related stress in their daily lives at all SES levels [102]. Racial groups do not have the same chance of upward social mobility in the US [103]. High SES African American families show an increase in exposure [104,105,106,107,108] and vulnerability [109] to discrimination, which may reduce the protective effects of SES on health. African American families with high SES are frequently surrounded by non-Hispanic Whites, which increases their exposure to discrimination [104,105]. Discrimination results in poor health across domains and limits the health gains that follow improving SES [107,109,110].
Residential segregation results in differences in African American and non-Hispanic White environmental and contextual exposures. Due to segregation, school options are different for high SES African American and Hispanic families. As a result, children of high SES African American families attend highly segregated schools with low resources [70,71,111]. That means there are differential effects of SES on education and schooling of non-Hispanic White and African American. While high SES non-Hispanic White adolescents attend schools in suburban areas with more funding and higher-quality teachers, African Americans go to schools that are of less quality [112].
While lower SES of African Americans is one type of disadvantage, MDRs reflect another class of disadvantage [56,57]. While the first one is about a lack of access to SES resources, MDRs are reflective of unequal outcomes despite access to SES. Thus, researchers and policymakers should not only address inequality in SES, but they should also address inequality in the returns of SES. African Americans are at a double disadvantage because they are affected by low SES and low return of the existing SES resources [56,113].
Multilevel economic, psychological, and societal mechanisms may be involved in explaining racial gaps in the returns of parental education [56,113]. MDRs may be due to racism across multiple societal institutions and social structures [56,113]. Racial prejudice interferes with the processes that are needed to gain benefits from available SES resources [114,115,116]. MDRs of educational attainment may be in part due to a history of childhood poverty [117]. The current study, however, did not explore societal and contextual processes that could explain such MDRs.
African American families are more likely to stay in poor neighborhoods despite high SES. Highly educated African Americans are more likely to stay poor than non-Hispanic Whites [77,118]. Similarly, African American families from high SES backgrounds are more likely to remain at risk of negative environmental exposures than non-Hispanic Whites with similar SES [104,105,107,119,120,121,122,123]. Similarly, high SES African American adolescents spend time with peers with higher risk and behavioral problems than non-Hispanic Whites with the same SES [63,98].
As this study showed, health disparities are not all due to SES differences, and some can be seen across all SES spectrum. This means, it is not race or SES but race and SES that shape health disparities [124,125,126]. The implication of these MDRs is that merely equalizing access to SES is not enough to tackle racial inequalities. Beyond attempts to eliminate or reduce SES gaps, there is a need to increase the degree to which SES can result in outcomes for African American families. To do so, policymakers should think about societal, environmental, and structural barriers that generate MDRs by reducing African Americas’ ability to leverage their resources. A real solution to MDRs-related disparities should be different from a solution to those who are caused by the SES-gaps. While the policy solution to health disparities due to SES gap is to increase African Americans’ access to SES resources, a true and sustainable remedy to the MDRs-related inequalities is to reduce structural barriers so African American families can efficiently and effectively translate their SES and human capital and secure tangible outcomes. This is not possible unless we equalize the daily living conditions of African Americans and non-Hispanic Whites.
While this study’s main association of interest was the effect of parental education on RR, we also found auxiliary results. We found results considering gender. In the pooled sample, boys showed a higher RR than girls. In Whites but not Blacks, males had higher RR. A higher reward responsiveness of males than females is known. This is also related to the higher impulsivity [127,128,129,130,131], reward dependence [16,132,133,134,135,136,137,138,139], and novelty seeking [140,141,142,143] of males than females. The result is a higher risk taking of males than females [127,144,145,146]. However, as mentioned before, this was not an exploratory study on correlates of RR. We were specifically interested in knowing if Black and White youth differ in the contribution of their parental educational attainment on their RR.
We also want to make it clear that MDRs are not due to Kelly’s Paradox [147] or regression toward the mean [148,149,150,151,152]. Under certain conditions, statistical artifacts, like regression to the mean or Kelly’s paradox, can produce similar results. However, in previous research [80], we showed that the MDRs were not attributable to statistical artifacts. While we do not verify that this is the case in the present study, we would argue, based on past results, that these MDRs represent the effects of the social environment. Kelly’s paradox [147], closely related to the regression to the mean [148,149,150,151,152], may occur when multiple groups with different starting points are compared. As described by Wainer and Brown (2007) [147], when a person from the poor-performing group exceeds the expectations, that person is expected to continue to overachieve, meaning he/she would perform even better. The opposite is also relevant to an underperformer in a high-performing group. In both cases, in reality, and opposite to the expectation, the individuals would regress toward their group means. That means, underperformers in a high-performing group and overperformers in a low-performing group are all more likely to have the average outcome rather than the expected outcome. In a recent paper, we have shown that MDRs are not due to regression toward the mean or Kelley’s paradox [147]. In fact, MDRs are not exclusively to the high-achiever or high-performance individuals, but any incremental increase in the resource generates less increase in the outcome for Blacks than Whites.

5. Limitations

This study, like any other studies, comes with a specific set of methodological limitations. As our data were cross-sectional in nature, we could not draw any causal inference between race, parent education, and adolescents’ RR. Similarly, we only tested the MDRs of parent education. Future research should test if MDRs go beyond parent education and hold for other SES indicators such as income, wealth, class, occupational prestige, and neighborhood SES indicators. Finally, this study only described the MDRs of parent education on RR and did not seek to understand the contextual factors that cause such MDRs.
In this study, RR [1] was measured using the behavioral approach, using BAS, which was developed by the Carver and White. We are unaware of any studies on the psychometric properties of this scale by race. So, we are not confident that the applied item measures identically the very same constructs in our race groups. So, there is a need to study if this measure is invariant across groups. As expected, we found a main effect of race on RR, suggesting that in line with the literature on associated traits such as impulsivity [64], RR is higher in Black than White youth. Future research should assess racial variation in measurement aspects of the BAS-based RR variable. Such effort would increase our confidence in comparing the results across groups and the observed means.

6. Conclusions

Relative to their non-Hispanic White counterparts, African American adolescents show lower parent education and higher RR. This adversity in African American youth is compounded by another profound and systemic disadvantage, weaker effects of parent education on adolescents RR. As a result of the latter disadvantage, African American adolescents show low RR across all parental education levels. That means some of the racial inequalities in RR remains across all educational levels. In other terms, racial inequalities in RR show a spill-over effect in middle-class people. As a result of high RR, African American adolescents engage in a high risk of behaviors across all levels of parental education. This is in contrast to the pattern for non-Hispanic White adolescents who show a social patterning of their RR. That is, for non-Hispanic White youth, RR is lowest when parental education is highest.

Author Contributions

S.A. conceptualization, data analysis, first draft, and revision. S.B., G.A., M.B., and C.H.C. conceptualization and revision. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

Shervin Assari is supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants D084526-03, 5S21MD000103, CA201415 02, DA035811-05, U54MD008149, U54MD007598, and U54CA229974.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Van den Berg, I.; Franken, I.H.; Muris, P. A new scale for measuring reward responsiveness. Front. Psychol. 2010, 1, 239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Johnson, P.L.; Potts, G.F.; Sanchez-Ramos, J.; Cimino, C.R. Self-reported impulsivity in Huntington’s disease patients and relationship to executive dysfunction and reward responsiveness. J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 2017, 39, 694–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Powell, J.; Dawkins, L.; Davis, R.E. Smoking, reward responsiveness, and response inhibition: Tests of an incentive motivational model. Biol. Psychiatry 2002, 51, 151–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Barr, R.S.; Pizzagalli, D.A.; Culhane, M.A.; Goff, D.C.; Evins, A.E. A single dose of nicotine enhances reward responsiveness in nonsmokers: Implications for development of dependence. Biol. Psychiatry 2008, 63, 1061–1065. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. Cummings, J.R.; Gearhardt, A.N.; Miller, A.L.; Hyde, L.W.; Lumeng, J.C. Maternal nicotine dependence is associated with longitudinal increases in child obesogenic eating behaviors. Pediatr. Obes. 2019, 14, e12541. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Pergadia, M.L.; Der-Avakian, A.; D’Souza, M.S.; Madden, P.A.F.; Heath, A.C.; Shiffman, S.; Markou, A.; Pizzagalli, D.A. Association between nicotine withdrawal and reward responsiveness in humans and rats. JAMA Psychiatry 2014, 71, 1238–1245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Snuggs, S.; Hajek, P. Responsiveness to reward following cessation of smoking. Psychopharmacology 2013, 225, 869–873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Janes, A.C.; Pedrelli, P.; Whitton, A.E.; Pechtel, P.; Douglas, S.; Martinson, M.A.; Huz, I.; Fava, M.; Pizzagalli, D.A.; Evins, A.E. Reward Responsiveness Varies by Smoking Status in Women with a History of Major Depressive Disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 2015, 40, 1940–1946. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Aloi, J.; Blair, K.S.; Crum, K.I.; Bashford-Largo, J.; Zhang, R.; Lukoff, J.; Carollo, E.; White, S.F.; Hwang, S.; Filbey, F.M.; et al. Alcohol Use Disorder, But Not Cannabis Use Disorder, Symptomatology in Adolescents Is Associated With Reduced Differential Responsiveness to Reward Versus Punishment Feedback During Instrumental Learning. Biol. Psychiatry Cogn. Neurosci. Neuroimaging 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Black, A.C.; Rosen, M.I. A money management-based substance use treatment increases valuation of future rewards. Addict. Behav. 2011, 36, 125–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Boger, K.D.; Auerbach, R.P.; Pechtel, P.; Busch, A.B.; Greenfield, S.F.; Pizzagalli, D.A. Co-Occurring Depressive and Substance Use Disorders in Adolescents: An Examination of Reward Responsiveness During Treatment. J. Psychother. Integr. 2014, 24, 109–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  12. Enoch, M.A.; Gorodetsky, E.; Hodgkinson, C.; Roy, A.; Goldman, D. Functional genetic variants that increase synaptic serotonin and 5-HT3 receptor sensitivity predict alcohol and drug dependence. Mol. Psychiatry 2011, 16, 1139–1146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  13. Cummings, J.R.; Lumeng, J.C.; Miller, A.L.; Hyde, L.W.; Siada, R.; Gearhardt, A.N. Parental substance use and child reward-driven eating behaviors. Appetite 2020, 144, 104486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Carver, C.S.; White, T.L. Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: The BIS/BAS scales. J. Personal. Soc. Psychol. 1994, 67, 319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Harmon-Jones, E. Anger and the behavioral approach system. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2003, 35, 995–1005. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Balda, M.A.; Anderson, K.L.; Itzhak, Y. Adolescent and adult responsiveness to the incentive value of cocaine reward in mice: Role of neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS) gene. Neuropharmacology 2006, 51, 341–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Opel, N.; Redlich, R.; Grotegerd, D.; Dohm, K.; Haupenthal, C.; Heindel, W.; Kugel, H.; Arolt, V.; Dannlowski, U. Enhanced neural responsiveness to reward associated with obesity in the absence of food-related stimuli. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2015, 36, 2330–2337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Johnson, S.L.; Turner, R.J.; Iwata, N. BIS/BAS levels and psychiatric disorder: An epidemiological study. J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 2003, 25, 25–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Blum, R.W.; Beuhring, T.; Shew, M.L.; Bearinger, L.H.; Sieving, R.E.; Resnick, M.D. The effects of race/ethnicity, income, and family structure on adolescent risk behaviors. Am. J. Public Health 2000, 90, 1879. [Google Scholar]
  20. Zalot, A.; Jones, D.J.; Kincaid, C.; Smith, T. Hyperactivity, impulsivity, inattention (HIA) and conduct problems among African American youth: The roles of neighborhood and gender. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol. 2009, 37, 535–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Weiss, N.H.; Tull, M.T.; Davis, L.T.; Dehon, E.E.; Fulton, J.J.; Gratz, K.L. Examining the association between emotion regulation difficulties and probable posttraumatic stress disorder within a sample of African Americans. Cogn. Behav. Ther. 2012, 41, 5–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Alloy, L.B.; Bender, R.E.; Whitehouse, W.G.; Wagner, C.A.; Liu, R.T.; Grant, D.A.; Jager-Hyman, S.; Molz, A.; Choi, J.Y.; Harmon-Jones, E.; et al. High Behavioral Approach System (BAS) sensitivity, reward responsiveness, and goal-striving predict first onset of bipolar spectrum disorders: A prospective behavioral high-risk design. J. Abnorm. Psychol. 2012, 121, 339–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Gray, J. Neural systems of motivation, emotion and affect. In Neurobiology of Learning, Emotion and Affect; Maden, J., Ed.; Raven Press: New York, NY, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  24. McNaughton, N.; Gray, J.A. Anxiolytic action on the behavioural inhibition system implies multiple types of arousal contribute to anxiety. J. Affect. Disord. 2000, 61, 161–176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Fletcher, K.; Parker, G.; Manicavasagar, V. Behavioral Activation System (BAS) differences in bipolar I and II disorder. J. Affect. Disord. 2013, 151, 121–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Keough, M.T.; Wardell, J.D.; Hendershot, C.S.; Bagby, R.M.; Quilty, L.C. Fun Seeking and Reward Responsiveness Moderate the Effect of the Behavioural Inhibition System on Coping-Motivated Problem Gambling. J. Gambl. Stud. 2017, 33, 769–782. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. Tsypes, A.; Gibb, B.E. Time of day differences in neural reward responsiveness in children. Psychophysiology 2020, 57, e13550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Kujawa, A.; Burkhouse, K.L.; Karich, S.R.; Fitzgerald, K.D.; Monk, C.S.; Phan, K.L. Reduced Reward Responsiveness Predicts Change in Depressive Symptoms in Anxious Children and Adolescents Following Treatment. J. Child Adolesc. Psychopharmacol. 2019, 29, 378–385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Cotten, N.U.; Resnick, J.; Browne, D.C.; Martin, S.L.; McCarraher, D.R.; Woods, J. Aggression and fighting behavior among African-American adolescents: Individual and family factors. Am. J. Public Health 1994, 84, 618–622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Cavazos-Rehg, P.A.; Krauss, M.J.; Spitznagel, E.L.; Schootman, M.; Bucholz, K.K.; Peipert, J.F.; Sanders-Thompson, V.; Cottler, L.B.; Bierut, L.J. Age of sexual debut among US adolescents. Contraception 2009, 80, 158–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Bumpus, J.P.; Umeh, Z.; Harris, A.L. Social Class and Educational Attainment: Do Blacks Benefit Less from Increases in Parents’ Social Class Status? Sociol. Race Ethn. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Cohen, G.L.; Sherman, D.K. Stereotype threat and the social and scientific contexts of the race achievement gap. Am. Psychol. 2005, 60, 270–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Burchinal, M.; McCartney, K.; Steinberg, L.; Crosnoe, R.; Friedman, S.L.; McLoyd, V.; Pianta, R.; Network, N.E.C.C.R. Examining the Black-White achievement gap among low-income children using the NICHD study of early child care and youth development. Child Dev. 2011, 82, 1404–1420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Gorey, K.M. Comprehensive School Reform: Meta-Analytic Evidence of Black-White Achievement Gap Narrowing. Educ. Policy Anal. Arch. 2009, 17, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Hair, N.L.; Hanson, J.L.; Wolfe, B.L.; Pollak, S.D. Association of Child Poverty, Brain Development, and Academic Achievement. JAMA Pediatr. 2015, 169, 822–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Kaufman, J.S.; Cooper, R.S.; McGee, D.L. Socioeconomic status and health in blacks and whites: The problem of residual confounding and the resiliency of race. Epidemiology 1997, 8, 621–628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Valencia, M.L.C.; Tran, B.T.; Lim, M.K.; Choi, K.S.; Oh, J.K. Association Between Socioeconomic Status and Early Initiation of Smoking, Alcohol Drinking, and Sexual Behavior Among Korean Adolescents. Asia Pac. J. Public Health 2019, 31, 443–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ahmad, A.; Zulaily, N.; Shahril, M.R.; Syed Abdullah, E.F.H.; Ahmed, A. Association between socioeconomic status and obesity among 12-year-old Malaysian adolescents. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0200577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Merz, E.C.; Tottenham, N.; Noble, K.G. Socioeconomic Status, Amygdala Volume, and Internalizing Symptoms in Children and Adolescents. J. Clin. Child Adolesc. Psychol. 2018, 47, 312–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Dismukes, A.; Shirtcliff, E.; Jones, C.W.; Zeanah, C.; Theall, K.; Drury, S. The development of the cortisol response to dyadic stressors in Black and White infants. Dev. Psychopathol. 2018, 30, 1995–2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hanson, J.L.; Nacewicz, B.M.; Sutterer, M.J.; Cayo, A.A.; Schaefer, S.M.; Rudolph, K.D.; Shirtcliff, E.A.; Pollak, S.D.; Davidson, R.J. Behavioral problems after early life stress: Contributions of the hippocampus and amygdala. Biol. Psychiatry 2015, 77, 314–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Miller, B.; Taylor, J. Racial and socioeconomic status differences in depressive symptoms among black and white youth: An examination of the mediating effects of family structure, stress and support. J. Youth Adolesc. 2012, 41, 426–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. DeSantis, A.S.; Adam, E.K.; Doane, L.D.; Mineka, S.; Zinbarg, R.E.; Craske, M.G. Racial/ethnic differences in cortisol diurnal rhythms in a community sample of adolescents. J. Adolesc. Health 2007, 41, 3–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Alvarado, S.E. The impact of childhood neighborhood disadvantage on adult joblessness and income. Soc. Sci. Res. 2018, 70, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Barreto, S.M.; de Figueiredo, R.C.; Giatti, L. Socioeconomic inequalities in youth smoking in Brazil. BMJ Open 2013, 3, e003538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  46. Schreier, H.M.; Chen, E. Socioeconomic status and the health of youth: A multilevel, multidomain approach to conceptualizing pathways. Psychol. Bull. 2013, 139, 606–654. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Hemovich, V.; Lac, A.; Crano, W.D. Understanding early-onset drug and alcohol outcomes among youth: The role of family structure, social factors, and interpersonal perceptions of use. Psychol. Health Med. 2011, 16, 249–267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  48. Bell, C.N.; Sacks, T.K.; Thomas Tobin, C.S.; Thorpe, R.J., Jr. Racial Non-equivalence of Socioeconomic Status and Self-rated Health among African Americans and Whites. SSM Popul. Health 2020, 10, 100561. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Samuel, L.J.; Roth, D.L.; Schwartz, B.S.; Thorpe, R.J.; Glass, T.A. Socioeconomic Status, Race/Ethnicity, and Diurnal Cortisol Trajectories in Middle-Aged and Older Adults. J. Gerontol. B Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 2018, 73, 468–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  50. Fuentes, M.; Hart-Johnson, T.; Green, C.R. The association among neighborhood socioeconomic status, race and chronic pain in black and white older adults. J. Natl. Med. Assoc. 2007, 99, 1160–1169. [Google Scholar]
  51. Assari, S.; Khoshpouri, P.; Chalian, H. Combined Effects of Race and Socioeconomic Status on Cancer Beliefs, Cognitions, and Emotions. Healthcare 2019, 7, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. Assari, S. Number of Chronic Medical Conditions Fully Mediates the Effects of Race on Mortality; 25-Year Follow-Up of a Nationally Representative Sample of Americans. J. Racial Ethn. Health Disparities 2017, 4, 623–631. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Assari, S. Distal, intermediate, and proximal mediators of racial disparities in renal disease mortality in the United States. J. Nephropathol. 2016, 5, 51–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Williams, D.R.; Costa, M.V.; Odunlami, A.O.; Mohammed, S.A. Moving upstream: How interventions that address the social determinants of health can improve health and reduce disparities. J. Public Health Manag. Pract. 2008, 14, S8–S17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Williams, D.R. Race, socioeconomic status, and health the added effects of racism and discrimination. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1999, 896, 173–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Assari, S. Health Disparities due to Diminished Return among Black Americans: Public Policy Solutions. Soc. Issues Policy Rev. 2018, 12, 112–145. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Assari, S. Unequal Gain of Equal Resources across Racial Groups. Int. J. Health Policy Manag. 2018, 7, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Bleich, S.N.; Jarlenski, M.P.; Bell, C.N.; LaVeist, T.A. Health inequalities: Trends, progress, and policy. Annu. Rev. Public Health 2012, 33, 7–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Homma, Y.; Saewyc, E.; Zumbo, B.D. Is it getting better? An analytical method to test trends in health disparities, with tobacco use among sexual minority vs. heterosexual youth as an example. Int J. Equity Health 2016, 15, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. Lorant, V.; de Gelder, R.; Kapadia, D.; Borrell, C.; Kalediene, R.; Kovacs, K.; Leinsalu, M.; Martikainen, P.; Menvielle, G.; Regidor, E.; et al. Socioeconomic inequalities in suicide in Europe: The widening gap. Br. J. Psychiatry 2018, 212, 356–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Mackenbach, J.P.; Bos, V.; Andersen, O.; Cardano, M.; Costa, G.; Harding, S.; Reid, A.; Hemstrom, O.; Valkonen, T.; Kunst, A.E. Widening socioeconomic inequalities in mortality in six Western European countries. Int. J. Epidemiol. 2003, 32, 830–837. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Whitehead, M.M. Where do we stand? Research and policy issues concerning inequalities in health and in healthcare. Acta Oncol. 1999, 38, 41–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H.; Bazargan, M. Association Between Parental Educational Attainment and Youth Outcomes and Role of Race/Ethnicity. JAMA Netw. Open 2019, 2, e1916018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H.; Mincy, R. Family Socioeconomic Status at Birth and Youth Impulsivity at Age 15; Blacks’ Diminished Return. Children 2018, 5, 58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  65. Assari, S.; Thomas, A.; Caldwell, C.H.; Mincy, R.B. Blacks’ Diminished Health Return of Family Structure and Socioeconomic Status; 15 Years of Follow-up of a National Urban Sample of Youth. J. Urban. Health 2018, 95, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Assari, S.; Bazargan, M. Being Married Increases Life Expectancy of White but Not Black Americans. J. Fam. Reprod Health 2019, 13, 132–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H. High Risk of Depression in High-Income African American Boys. J. Racial Ethn. Health Disparities 2018, 5, 808–819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H.; Mincy, R.B. Maternal Educational Attainment at Birth Promotes Future Self-Rated Health of White but Not Black Youth: A 15-Year Cohort of a National Sample. J. Clin. Med. 2018, 7, 93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  69. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H.; Zimmerman, M.A. Family Structure and Subsequent Anxiety Symptoms; Minorities’ Diminished Return. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  70. Assari, S. Parental Educational Attainment and Academic Performance of American College Students; Blacks’ Diminished Returns. J. Health Econ. Dev. 2019, 1, 21–31. [Google Scholar]
  71. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H. Parental Educational Attainment Differentially Boosts School Performance of American Adolescents: Minorities’ Diminished Returns. J. Fam. Reprod Health 2019, 13, 7–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H. Family Income at Birth and Risk of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder at Age 15: Racial Differences. Children 2019, 6, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  73. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Bazargan, M.; Mincy, R.; Caldwell, C.H. Unequal Protective Effects of Parental Educational Attainment on the Body Mass Index of Black and White Youth. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  74. Assari, S.; Farokhnia, M.; Mistry, R. Education Attainment and Alcohol Binge Drinking: Diminished Returns of Hispanics in Los Angeles. Behav. Sci. 2019, 9, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  75. Assari, S. Parental Education Attainment and Educational Upward Mobility; Role of Race and Gender. Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  76. Assari, S. Parental Educational Attainment and Mental Well-Being of College Students; Diminished Returns of Blacks. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  77. Assari, S. Parental Education Better Helps White than Black Families Escape Poverty: National Survey of Children’s Health. Economies 2018, 6, 30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  78. Assari, S. Blacks’ Diminished Return of Education Attainment on Subjective Health; Mediating Effect of Income. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  79. Assari, S.; Hani, N. Household Income and Children’s Unmet Dental Care Need; Blacks’ Diminished Return. Dent. J. 2018, 6, 17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  80. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Bazargan, M.; Caldwell, C.H. Diminished Returns of Parental Education in Terms of Youth School Performance: Ruling Out Regression Toward the Mean. Children 2020, in press. [Google Scholar]
  81. Alcohol Research: Current Reviews Editorial. NIH’s Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study. Alcohol. Res. 2018, 39, 97.
  82. Casey, B.J.; Cannonier, T.; Conley, M.I.; Cohen, A.O.; Barch, D.M.; Heitzeg, M.M.; Soules, M.E.; Teslovich, T.; Dellarco, D.V.; Garavan, H.; et al. The Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) study: Imaging acquisition across 21 sites. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2018, 32, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Karcher, N.R.; O’Brien, K.J.; Kandala, S.; Barch, D.M. Resting-State Functional Connectivity and Psychotic-like Experiences in Childhood: Results From the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development Study. Biol. Psychiatry 2019, 86, 7–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  84. Lisdahl, K.M.; Sher, K.J.; Conway, K.P.; Gonzalez, R.; Feldstein Ewing, S.W.; Nixon, S.J.; Tapert, S.; Bartsch, H.; Goldstein, R.Z.; Heitzeg, M. Adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) study: Overview of substance use assessment methods. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2018, 32, 80–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Luciana, M.; Bjork, J.M.; Nagel, B.J.; Barch, D.M.; Gonzalez, R.; Nixon, S.J.; Banich, M.T. Adolescent neurocognitive development and impacts of substance use: Overview of the adolescent brain cognitive development (ABCD) baseline neurocognition battery. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2018, 32, 67–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Auchter, A.M.; Hernandez Mejia, M.; Heyser, C.J.; Shilling, P.D.; Jernigan, T.L.; Brown, S.A.; Tapert, S.F.; Dowling, G.J. A description of the ABCD organizational structure and communication framework. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2018, 32, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Garavan, H.; Bartsch, H.; Conway, K.; Decastro, A.; Goldstein, R.Z.; Heeringa, S.; Jernigan, T.; Potter, A.; Thompson, W.; Zahs, D. Recruiting the ABCD sample: Design considerations and procedures. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2018, 32, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Jaeger, D.A. Reconciling the old and new census bureau education questions: Recommendations for researchers. J. Bus. Econ. Stat. 1997, 15, 300–309. [Google Scholar]
  89. Assari, S. Parental Education on Youth Inhibitory Control in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study: Blacks’ Diminished Returns. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  90. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Caldwell, C.H.; Bazargan, M. Minorities’ Diminished Returns of Parental Educational Attainment on Adolescents’ Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Problems. Children 2020, 7, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Assari, S. Education Attainment and ObesityDifferential Returns Based on Sexual Orientation. Behav. Sci. 2019, 9, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Assari, S. Family Income Reduces Risk of Obesity for White but Not Black Children. Children 2018, 5, 73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  93. Assari, S. Life Expectancy Gain Due to Employment Status Depends on Race, Gender, Education, and Their Intersections. J. Racial Ethn. Health Disparities 2018, 5, 375–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  94. Assari, S.; Lankarani, M.M. Education and Alcohol Consumption among Older Americans; Black-White Differences. Front. Public Health 2016, 4, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Shervin, A.; Ritesh, M. Diminished Return of Employment on Ever Smoking Among Hispanic Whites in Los Angeles. Health Equity 2019, 3, 138–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Assari, S. Socioeconomic Determinants of Systolic Blood Pressure; Minorities’ Diminished Returns. J. Health Econ. Dev. 2019, 1, 1. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  97. Assari, S. Socioeconomic Status and Self-Rated Oral Health; Diminished Return among Hispanic Whites. Dent. J. 2018, 6, 11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  98. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Bazargan, M.; Caldwell, C.H. Mathematical Performance of American Youth: Diminished Returns of Educational Attainment of Asian-American Parents. Educ. Sci. 2020, 10, 32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  99. Assari, S.; Bazargan, M. Protective Effects of Educational Attainment Against Cigarette Smoking; Diminished Returns of American Indians and Alaska Natives in the National Health Interview Survey. Int. J. Travel Med. Glob. Health 2019, 7, 105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Assari, S. Income and Mental Well-Being of Middle-Aged and Older Americans: Immigrants’ Diminished Returns. Int. J. Travel Med. Glob. Health 2020, 8, 37–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Bazargan, M.; Caldwell, C.H.; Zimmerman, M.A. Place-Based Diminished Returns of Parental Educational Attainment on School Performance of Non-Hispanic White Youth. Front. Educ. 2020, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Bowden, M.; Bartkowski, J.; Xu, X.; Lewis, R., Jr. Parental occupation and the gender math gap: Examining the social reproduction of academic advantage among elementary and middle school students. Soc. Sci. 2017, 7, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  103. Chetty, R.; Hendren, N.; Kline, P.; Saez, E. Where is the land of opportunity? The geography of intergenerational mobility in the United States. Q. J. Econ. 2014, 129, 1553–1623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  104. Assari, S.; Gibbons, F.X.; Simons, R. Depression among Black Youth; Interaction of Class and Place. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  105. Assari, S.; Gibbons, F.X.; Simons, R.L. Perceived Discrimination among Black Youth: An 18-Year Longitudinal Study. Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  106. Assari, S. Does School Racial Composition Explain Why High Income Black Youth Perceive More Discrimination? A Gender Analysis. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  107. Assari, S.; Lankarani, M.M.; Caldwell, C.H. Does Discrimination Explain High Risk of Depression among High-Income African American Men? Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Assari, S.; Moghani Lankarani, M. Workplace Racial Composition Explains High Perceived Discrimination of High Socioeconomic Status African American Men. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Assari, S.; Preiser, B.; Lankarani, M.M.; Caldwell, C.H. Subjective Socioeconomic Status Moderates the Association between Discrimination and Depression in African American Youth. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Assari, S.; Caldwell, C.H. Social Determinants of Perceived Discrimination among Black Youth: Intersection of Ethnicity and Gender. Children 2018, 5, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Bazargan, M.; Caldwell, C.H. African Americans’ Diminished Returns of Parental Education on Adolescents’ Depression and Suicide in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study. Eur. J. Investig. Health Psychol. Educ. 2020, 10, 48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Jefferson, A.L.; Gibbons, L.E.; Rentz, D.M.; Carvalho, J.O.; Manly, J.; Bennett, D.A.; Jones, R.N. A life course model of cognitive activities, socioeconomic status, education, reading ability, and cognition. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2011, 59, 1403–1411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  113. Assari, S.; Nikahd, A.; Malekahmadi, M.R.; Lankarani, M.M.; Zamanian, H. Race by Gender Group Differences in the Protective Effects of Socioeconomic Factors Against Sustained Health Problems Across Five Domains. J. Racial Ethn. Health Disparities 2017, 4, 884–894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Hudson, D.L.; Bullard, K.M.; Neighbors, H.W.; Geronimus, A.T.; Yang, J.; Jackson, J.S. Are benefits conferred with greater socioeconomic position undermined by racial discrimination among African American men? J. Mens. Health 2012, 9, 127–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  115. Hudson, D.L.; Neighbors, H.W.; Geronimus, A.T.; Jackson, J.S. The relationship between socioeconomic position and depression among a US nationally representative sample of African Americans. Soc. Psychiatry Psychiatr. Epidemiol. 2012, 47, 373–381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  116. Hudson, D.; Sacks, T.; Irani, K.; Asher, A. The Price of the Ticket: Health Costs of Upward Mobility among African Americans. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020, 17, 1179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  117. Bartik, T.J.; Hershbein, B. Degrees of Poverty: The Relationship between Family Income Background and the Returns to Education; WE Upjohn Institute for Employment Research: Kalamazoo, MI, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  118. Assari, S.; Preiser, B.; Kelly, M. Education and Income Predict Future Emotional Well-Being of Whites but Not Blacks: A Ten-Year Cohort. Brain Sci. 2018, 8, 122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  119. Assari, S.; Bazargan, M. Second-hand exposure home Second-Hand Smoke Exposure at Home in the United States; Minorities’ Diminished Returns. Int. J. Travel Med. Glob. Health 2019, 7, 135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Assari, S.; Bazargan, M. Unequal Effects of Educational Attainment on Workplace Exposure to Second-Hand Smoke by Race and Ethnicity; Minorities’ Diminished Returns in the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS). J. Med. Res. Innov. 2019, 3, e000179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Assari, S. Family Socioeconomic Status and Exposure to Childhood Trauma: Racial Differences. Children 2020, 7, 57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Race Assari, S. Intergenerational Social Mobility and Stressful Life Events. Behav. Sci. 2018, 8, 86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  123. Assari, S.; Bazargan, M. Unequal Associations between Educational Attainment and Occupational Stress across Racial and Ethnic Groups. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2019, 16, 3539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  124. Navarro, V. Race or class or race and class: Growing mortality differentials in the United States. Int. J. Health Serv. 1991, 21, 229–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  125. Navarro, V. Race or class versus race and class: Mortality differentials in the United States. Lancet 1990, 336, 1238–1240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Navarro, V. Race or class, or race and class. Int. J. Health Serv. 1989, 19, 311–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Bajaj, S.; Killgore, W.D.S. Sex differences in limbic network and risk-taking propensity in healthy individuals. J. Neurosci. Res. 2020, 98, 371–383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Bjork, J.M.; Straub, L.K.; Provost, R.G.; Neale, M.C. The ABCD study of neurodevelopment: Identifying neurocircuit targets for prevention and treatment of adolescent substance abuse. Curr. Treat. Options Psychiatry 2017, 4, 196–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Chowdhury, T.G.; Wallin-Miller, K.G.; Rear, A.A.; Park, J.; Diaz, V.; Simon, N.W.; Moghaddam, B. Sex differences in reward- and punishment-guided actions. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 2019, 19, 1404–1417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  130. Navas, J.F.; Martin-Perez, C.; Petrova, D.; Verdejo-Garcia, A.; Cano, M.; Sagripanti-Mazuquin, O.; Perandres-Gomez, A.; Lopez-Martin, A.; Cordovilla-Guardia, S.; Megias, A.; et al. Sex differences in the association between impulsivity and driving under the influence of alcohol in young adults: The specific role of sensation seeking. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2019, 124, 174–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  131. Silveri, M.M.; Rohan, M.L.; Pimentel, P.J.; Gruber, S.A.; Rosso, I.M.; Yurgelun-Todd, D.A. Sex differences in the relationship between white matter microstructure and impulsivity in adolescents. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2006, 24, 833–841. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  132. Barrett, S.T.; Thompson, B.M.; Emory, J.R.; Larsen, C.E.; Pittenger, S.T.; Harris, E.N.; Bevins, R.A. Sex Differences in the Reward-Enhancing Effects of Nicotine on Ethanol Reinforcement: A Reinforcer Demand Analysis. Nicotine Tob. Res. 2020, 22, 238–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  133. Hammerslag, L.R.; Gulley, J.M. Age and sex differences in reward behavior in adolescent and adult rats. Dev. Psychobiol. 2014, 56, 611–621. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  134. Harden, K.P.; Mann, F.D.; Grotzinger, A.D.; Patterson, M.W.; Steinberg, L.; Tackett, J.L.; Tucker-Drob, E.M. Developmental differences in reward sensitivity and sensation seeking in adolescence: Testing sex-specific associations with gonadal hormones and pubertal development. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 2018, 115, 161–178. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  135. Richard, J.M. Female Rodents Yield New Insights into Compulsive Alcohol Use and the Impact of Dependence: Commentary on Xie et al., 2019, “Sex Differences in Ethanol Reward Seeking Under Conflict in Mice”. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 2019, 43, 1648–1650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Wallin-Miller, K.G.; Chesley, J.; Castrillon, J.; Wood, R.I. Sex differences and hormonal modulation of ethanol-enhanced risk taking in rats. Drug Alcohol. Depend. 2017, 174, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  137. Wang, J.; Fan, Y.; Dong, Y.; Ma, M.; Ma, Y.; Dong, Y.; Niu, Y.; Jiang, Y.; Wang, H.; Wang, Z.; et al. Alterations in Brain Structure and Functional Connectivity in Alcohol Dependent Patients and Possible Association with Impulsivity. PLoS ONE 2016, 11, e0161956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Westbrook, S.R.; Hankosky, E.R.; Dwyer, M.R.; Gulley, J.M. Age and sex differences in behavioral flexibility, sensitivity to reward value, and risky decision-making. Behav. Neurosci. 2018, 132, 75–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Xie, Q.; Buck, L.A.; Bryant, K.G.; Barker, J.M. Sex Differences in Ethanol Reward Seeking Under Conflict in Mice. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 2019, 43, 1556–1566. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  140. Davis, B.A.; Clinton, S.M.; Akil, H.; Becker, J.B. The effects of novelty-seeking phenotypes and sex differences on acquisition of cocaine self-administration in selectively bred High-Responder and Low-Responder rats. Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav. 2008, 90, 331–338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  141. Palanza, P.; Morley-Fletcher, S.; Laviola, G. Novelty seeking in periadolescent mice: Sex differences and influence of intrauterine position. Physiol Behav 2001, 72, 255–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Pitychoutis, P.M.; Pallis, E.G.; Mikail, H.G.; Papadopoulou-Daifoti, Z. Individual differences in novelty-seeking predict differential responses to chronic antidepressant treatment through sex- and phenotype-dependent neurochemical signatures. Behav. Brain Res. 2011, 223, 154–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Ray, J.; Hansen, S. Temperament in the rat: Sex differences and hormonal influences on harm avoidance and novelty seeking. Behav. Neurosci. 2004, 118, 488–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  144. Cobey, K.D.; Stulp, G.; Laan, F.; Buunk, A.P.; Pollet, T.V. Sex differences in risk taking behavior among Dutch cyclists. Evol. Psychol. 2013, 11, 350–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  145. Cross, C.P.; Cyrenne, D.L.; Brown, G.R. Sex differences in sensation-seeking: A meta-analysis. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 2486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  146. Killgore, W.D.; Grugle, N.L.; Killgore, D.B.; Balkin, T.J. Sex differences in self-reported risk-taking propensity on the Evaluation of Risks scale. Psychol. Rep. 2010, 106, 693–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  147. Listed, A.N. Three statistical paradoxes in the interpretation of group differences: Illustrated with medical school admission and licensing data. In Handbook of Statistics; Rao, C.R., Sinharay, S., Eds.; North-Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2006; Volume 26, pp. 893–918. [Google Scholar]
  148. Gmel, G.; Wicki, M.; Rehm, J.; Heeb, J.L. Estimating regression to the mean and true effects of an intervention in a four-wave panel study. Addiction 2008, 103, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  149. Stout, R.L. Regression to the mean in addiction research. Addiction 2008, 103, 53. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  150. Novack, G.D.; Crockett, R.S. Regression to the mean. Ocul. Surf. 2009, 7, 163–165. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  151. Furrow, R.E. Regression to the Mean in Pre-Post Testing: Using Simulations and Permutations to Develop Null Expectations. CBE Life Sci. Educ. 2019, 18, le2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Moore, M.N.; Atkins, E.R.; Salam, A.; Callisaya, M.L.; Hare, J.L.; Marwick, T.H.; Nelson, M.R.; Wright, L.; Sharman, J.E.; Rodgers, A. Regression to the mean of repeated ambulatory blood pressure monitoring in five studies. J. Hypertens 2019, 37, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Table
Table 1. Data overall and by race (n = 7072).
Table 1. Data overall and by race (n = 7072).
CharacteristicsAll Non-Hispanic Whites African Americans
n%n%n%
Race
Non-Hispanic Whites509972.15099100.0--
African Americans197327.9--1973100.0
Sex
Male341748.3243247.798549.9
Female365551.7266752.398850.1
Marital Status *
Other225731.990817.8134968.4
Married481568.1419182.262431.6
MeanSDMeanSDMeanSD
Age (Year)9.470.519.470.509.470.52
Household Size 4.701.524.721.404.631.81
Parent education (Census Coding) *16.922.4017.552.0015.302.57
Parent education (Jager Coding) *42.062.2042.611.8740.582.23
Reward Responsiveness (RR) *8.782.418.582.379.292.44
Note: SD = Standard deviation, * p < 0.05 for comparison of African American and non-Hispanic White adolescents.
Table
Table 2. Summary of linear regressions overall (n = 7072).
Table 2. Summary of linear regressions overall (n = 7072).
Model 1
Main Effects		Model 2
Interaction Effects
CharacteristicsbSE95% CI TpBSE95% CI tp
Education (Jager Code)
Race (African Americans)0.610.090.430.796.53<0.001−2.671.56−5.740.39−1.710.087
Sex (Male)0.310.070.170.454.44<0.0010.310.070.170.454.40<0.001
Age −0.020.07−0.160.11−0.310.760−0.020.07−0.160.11−0.350.727
Married Household−0.140.09−0.330.04−1.520.129−0.150.09−0.340.03−1.640.101
Household Size−0.030.02−0.080.01−1.370.171−0.030.02−0.080.01−1.370.171
Parent Education−0.070.02−0.11−0.04−3.85<0.001−0.100.02−0.14− 0.05−4.37<0.001
Parent Education × African Americans------0.080.040.010.152.100.035
Constant14.121.0412.0816.1613.57<0.00115.281.1812.9717.5912.99<0.001
Education (Census Code)
Race (African Americans)0.530.080.380.686.98<0.001−0.340.45−1.230.55−0.750.454
Sex (Male)0.330.060.210.445.69<0.0010.320.060.210.445.65<0.001
Age −0.050.06−0.160.06−0.880.381−0.050.06−0.160.06−0.910.361
Married Household−0.110.08−0.260.04−1.430.153−0.120.08−0.270.03−1.510.131
Household Size−0.030.02−0.060.01−1.330.185−0.030.02−0.070.01−1.340.181
Parent Education−0.050.01−0.08−0.03−3.79<0.001−0.070.02−0.11−0.04−4.22<0.001
Parent Education × African Americans------0.050.030.000.111.950.050
Constant10.030.598.8611.1916.90<0.00110.400.629.1811.6216.69<0.001
Note: Unstandardized Regression Coefficient (b); Standard Error (SE); Confidence Interval (CI); Outcome: Reward Responsiveness (RR); p ≤ 0.050 considered significant.
Table
Table 3. Summary of linear regressions between parental education and reward responsiveness (RR) by race (n = 7072).
Table 3. Summary of linear regressions between parental education and reward responsiveness (RR) by race (n = 7072).
Model 1
non-Hispanic Whites		Model 2
African Americans
CharacteristicsBSE95% CI TpbSE95% CI tp
Education (Jager Code)
Sex (Male)0.470.080.310.625.74<0.001−0.130.14−0.400.14−0.950.345
Age −0.080.08−0.230.08−0.940.3490.120.13−0.140.390.910.365
Married Household−0.230.11−0.450.00−2.000.0−0.010.16−0.330.31−0.070.944
Household Size −0.020.03−0.080.04−0.570.566−0.060.04−0.140.02−1.480.138
Parent Education−0.090.02−0.14−0.05−4.10<0.001−0.030.03−0.100.04−0.910.364
Constant15.421.2512.9717.8712.35<0.00111.981.878.3015.666.39<0.001
Education (Census Code)
Sex (Male)0.470.070.340.607.18<0.001−0.090.11− 0.320.13−0.830.405
Age −0.090.07−0.220.04−1.420.1570.070.11−0.150.290.610.539
Married Household−0.170.09−0.350.01−1.800.072−0.020.13−0.280.25−0.140.892
Household Size −0.010.02−0.060.04−0.540.592−0.050.03−0.110.02−1.470.141
Parent Education−0.070.02−0.10−0.03−3.97<0.001−0.030.02−0.070.02−1.050.296
Constant10.620.709.2411.9915.14<0.0019.311.127.1211.508.33<0.001
Note: Unstandardized Regression Coefficient (b); Standard Error (SE); Confidence Interval (CI); Outcome: Reward Responsiveness (RR).

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Assari, S.; Boyce, S.; Akhlaghipour, G.; Bazargan, M.; Caldwell, C.H. Reward Responsiveness in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study: African Americans’ Diminished Returns of Parental Education. Brain Sci. 2020, 10, 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060391

AMA Style

Assari S, Boyce S, Akhlaghipour G, Bazargan M, Caldwell CH. Reward Responsiveness in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study: African Americans’ Diminished Returns of Parental Education. Brain Sciences. 2020; 10(6):391. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060391

Chicago/Turabian Style

Assari, Shervin, Shanika Boyce, Golnoush Akhlaghipour, Mohsen Bazargan, and Cleopatra H. Caldwell. 2020. "Reward Responsiveness in the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study: African Americans’ Diminished Returns of Parental Education" Brain Sciences 10, no. 6: 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060391

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop