., 2009a,b, 2010; Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). In previous work, AG-490 site frontal negative slow waves were observed in anticipation of noxious stimuli such as aversive noise (Regan and Howard, 1995; Crowley et al., 2009a) and shocks (Baas et al., 2002). Additionally, studies have shown that slow wave amplitude is correlated to task difficulty especially to memory processing (Birbaumer et al., 1990; Rosler et al., 1997). The more negative slow wave response observed for exclusion by friend may reflect the more aversive nature of the event (Crowley et al., 2009a,b, 2010; Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). It is interesting to note that the greater P2 and slow wave response observed on stranger exclusion when compared to exclusion by friend are in contrast to our previous findings– rejection events delivered by kin were associated with greateramplitude of neural response when compared to those by a stranger (Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). The unexpected direction of the results led us to reflect on how the dynamics of a friendstranger pairing differs fundamentally from a kin-stranger pairing. In this study, the addition of a stranger to an existing friend dyad creates a unique situation, fundamentally different from kin based situations such as mother hild bonds. Whereas mother hild bonds are more or less stable in middle childhood, friendships wax and wane across development (Hartup, 1996). The greater uncertainty in this paradigm may tilt motivated attention for some youth toward perceived intrusion by a stranger (surveillance behavior). Previous studies have documented that perceived social isolation in children leads to increased surveillance behaviors and heightened sensitivity to social threats (Parker et al., 2005; Cacioppo and Hawkey, 2009; Lavallee and Parker, 2009). Second, social competition is a prominent feature in peer relations in childhood (Berndt, 1982; Fonzi et al., 1997; Schneider et al., 2005). In social situations that involve strangers, people make an active attempt to present themselves in a positive light to the stranger (Vohs et al., 2005). This is because friends already have pre-existing knowledge of one another whereas strangers do not. In contrast, social competition is a not a prominent characteristic in mother hild bonds where strangers are concerned. In the present study, exclusion by a stranger may engage more attention allocation and post exclusion processing than exclusion by a friend, either because of heightened surveillance behavior, due to enhanced social competition in this version of Cyberball, or possibly some combination of these Chaetocin price factors. The pattern of ERP effects related to psychological distress favor the surveillance interpretation as discussed next. Psychological distress, but not ostracism distress of the child, was uniquely associated with rejection based ERP’s. The greater an individual’s trait psychological distress, the more likely they showed a larger neural response (P2 and slow wave) to exclusion by the stranger. Perhaps, individuals with greater levels of baseline psychological distress engage in more surveillance behavior, reflecting their perception of a threat by individuals moving in on their friendships. Previous work has shown that low self-esteem and loneliness are associated with an overactive social monitoring system that is biased towards enhanced sensitivity but misidentification of social cues (Gardner et al., 2000, 2005). Specifically, lonely children tend to harbor cognitive biases, expec.., 2009a,b, 2010; Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). In previous work, frontal negative slow waves were observed in anticipation of noxious stimuli such as aversive noise (Regan and Howard, 1995; Crowley et al., 2009a) and shocks (Baas et al., 2002). Additionally, studies have shown that slow wave amplitude is correlated to task difficulty especially to memory processing (Birbaumer et al., 1990; Rosler et al., 1997). The more negative slow wave response observed for exclusion by friend may reflect the more aversive nature of the event (Crowley et al., 2009a,b, 2010; Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). It is interesting to note that the greater P2 and slow wave response observed on stranger exclusion when compared to exclusion by friend are in contrast to our previous findings– rejection events delivered by kin were associated with greateramplitude of neural response when compared to those by a stranger (Sreekrishnan et al., 2014). The unexpected direction of the results led us to reflect on how the dynamics of a friendstranger pairing differs fundamentally from a kin-stranger pairing. In this study, the addition of a stranger to an existing friend dyad creates a unique situation, fundamentally different from kin based situations such as mother hild bonds. Whereas mother hild bonds are more or less stable in middle childhood, friendships wax and wane across development (Hartup, 1996). The greater uncertainty in this paradigm may tilt motivated attention for some youth toward perceived intrusion by a stranger (surveillance behavior). Previous studies have documented that perceived social isolation in children leads to increased surveillance behaviors and heightened sensitivity to social threats (Parker et al., 2005; Cacioppo and Hawkey, 2009; Lavallee and Parker, 2009). Second, social competition is a prominent feature in peer relations in childhood (Berndt, 1982; Fonzi et al., 1997; Schneider et al., 2005). In social situations that involve strangers, people make an active attempt to present themselves in a positive light to the stranger (Vohs et al., 2005). This is because friends already have pre-existing knowledge of one another whereas strangers do not. In contrast, social competition is a not a prominent characteristic in mother hild bonds where strangers are concerned. In the present study, exclusion by a stranger may engage more attention allocation and post exclusion processing than exclusion by a friend, either because of heightened surveillance behavior, due to enhanced social competition in this version of Cyberball, or possibly some combination of these factors. The pattern of ERP effects related to psychological distress favor the surveillance interpretation as discussed next. Psychological distress, but not ostracism distress of the child, was uniquely associated with rejection based ERP’s. The greater an individual’s trait psychological distress, the more likely they showed a larger neural response (P2 and slow wave) to exclusion by the stranger. Perhaps, individuals with greater levels of baseline psychological distress engage in more surveillance behavior, reflecting their perception of a threat by individuals moving in on their friendships. Previous work has shown that low self-esteem and loneliness are associated with an overactive social monitoring system that is biased towards enhanced sensitivity but misidentification of social cues (Gardner et al., 2000, 2005). Specifically, lonely children tend to harbor cognitive biases, expec.
