Characterizing Resting-State Frontoparietal-Amygdala Network Connectivity as a Potential Moderator of the Developmental Link Between Executive Functioning and Internalizing Symptoms: A Group Iterative Multiple Model Estimation-Based Approach

Background Risks for internalizing behaviors may be moderated by attentional mechanisms such as inhibitory control and attention shifting. However, research is mixed on whether these dimensions are always favorable. Inhibitory control may exacerbate internalizing behaviors through behavioral rigidity, while data suggest that attention shifting is universally protective. Methods In a registered report using the Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development (ABCD) Study dataset, subgrouping group iterative multiple model estimation (S-GIMME) was applied to identify data-driven subgroups based on resting-state functional connectivity among frontoparietal network (FPN) regions of interest and the amygdala. Then we examined subgroup differences and the interaction between subgroup membership and executive functioning (EF) in association with longitudinal changes in internalizing symptoms through adolescence. Results Four network-based subgroups were identified. Subgroups with more overall FPN–FPN connections and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex–intraparietal sulcus (dlPFC–IPS) connections showed the highest EF performance relative to subgroups with more amygdala–FPN and inferior temporal gyrus–IPS (ITG–IPS) connections, although only select pairwise comparisons were statistically significant. There were no subgroup differences in internalizing symptoms or interactions with EF. Exploratory analysis revealed that subgroup differences in inhibitory control were sustained across time, whereby the high FPN–FPN subgroup showed greater improvement across development compared with the ITG–IPS subgroup. Conclusions FPN connectivity, particularly involving coupling between the dlPFC and IPS, functions to promote higher inhibitory control and attention shifting across development. However, the mechanistic link between EF and internalizing symptoms remains unclear, underscoring the need for future work that more precisely examines how specific attentional processes can confer risk or resilience for internalizing symptoms.