Perceptions of neighborhood threat and caregiver support in early adolescence: Sex differences in neural and behavioral correlates in the ABCD study.

BACKGROUND: Adolescents, particularly racial and ethnic minorities, are at increased risk for neighborhood threat and violence exposure, which impacts behavioral and neural outcomes. Caregiver support is associated with healthy socioemotional adjustment and self-regulatory and coping behaviors; however, it remains unclear whether caregiver support, specifically, consolation, can moderate the behavioral and neural impacts of neighborhood threat. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the role of youth-perceived neighborhood threat on neural and behavioral correlates and to test the moderating potential of caregiver support. Sex differences in associations were examined. PARTICIPANTS AND SETTING: 11,559 nine- and ten-year old youth enrolled in the multi-site Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study at baseline. METHODS: Associations were examined via linear regression models employing youth-perceived neighborhood threat and caregiver support. Regression and interaction models controlled for youth age, sex, race and ethnicity, primary caregiver's education, family income, family structure, youth-perceived school threat, and intracranial volume when examining neural outcomes. An ANOVA employing a Chi-square test and simple slopes analysis were used to identify significant interactions in moderation models. RESULTS: Neighborhood threat is associated with structural alterations in the left amygdala (p = .004). Meanwhile, caregiver support interacts in a dose-response fashion with neighborhood threat to attenuate its relationship with left amygdala volume (p = .008). Among youth reporting neighborhood threat, problematic behaviors were more common (p < .0001). While not significant, males reported higher rates of neighborhood threat than females (p = .267). Females reported greater levels of caregiver support (p = .017). Lastly, racial and ethnic differences in neighborhood threat and caregiver support were evident (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: While youth may not have been exposed to direct or immediate sources of threat and violence, these findings shed light on the impact of neighborhood threat perception on problematic behaviors and amygdala volume among nine- and ten-year olds. Future research should identify other culturally inclusive sources and measures of support and resiliency.