Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-46n74 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-05T13:19:19.558Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

The neurobiology of aggression and violence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 May 2015

Daniel R. Rosell
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Icahn Medical School, Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA Special Evaluation Program of Mood and Personality Disorders, Icahn Medical School, Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA
Larry J. Siever*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, Icahn Medical School, Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA Special Evaluation Program of Mood and Personality Disorders, Icahn Medical School, Mount Sinai, New York, New York, USA Department of Psychiatry and the VISN3 Mental Illness Research, Education, and Clinical Center (MIRECC), James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA
*
*Address for correspondence: Larry J. Siever, MD, James J. Peters Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, 130 West Kingsbridge Road, Room 6A–44, Bronx, NY 10468, USA. (Email: larry.siever@va.gov).
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Aggression and violence represent a significant public health concern and a clinical challenge for the mental healthcare provider. A great deal has been revealed regarding the neurobiology of violence and aggression, and an integration of this body of knowledge will ultimately serve to advance clinical diagnostics and therapeutic interventions. We will review here the latest findings regarding the neurobiology of aggression and violence. First, we will introduce the construct of aggression, with a focus on issues related to its heterogeneity, as well as the importance of refining the aggression phenotype in order to reduce pathophysiologic variability. Next we will examine the neuroanatomy of aggression and violence, focusing on regional volumes, functional studies, and interregional connectivity. Significant emphasis will be on the amygdala, as well as amygdala–frontal circuitry. Then we will turn our attention to the neurochemistry and molecular genetics of aggression and violence, examining the extensive findings on the serotonergic system, as well as the growing literature on the dopaminergic and vasopressinergic systems. We will also address the contribution of steroid hormones, namely, cortisol and testosterone. Finally, we will summarize these findings with a focus on reconciling inconsistencies and potential clinical implications; and, then we will suggest areas of focus for future directions in the field.

Information

Type
Review Articles
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 
Figure 0

Figure 1 Amygdala: functional subdivisions and basic organization of flow of information. The amygdala is not a unitary structure, and consideration of its anatomical subdivisions and circuitry is essential. (a) One of the best characterized models of information flow and intra-amygdala circuitry involves the basolateral nuclear complex (which subsumes lateral and basal nuclei) and the central nuclear complex (which consists of a lateral [light red] and medial component [dark red]); these 2 complexes are considered the primary input and output components of this circuit, respectively. The basolateral complex receives cortical and thalamic sensory input. The lateral nucleus projects to the basal and central nuclei (lateral component); the basal nucleus projects to the central nucleus (medial component), as well as the intercalated masses (IM). The IMs are clusters of GABAergic inhibitory neurons, nestled between basolateral and central nuclei, which play a critical role in regulating central nucleus activity. The central nucleus projects to various subcortical regions, such as the hypothalamus, bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (BNST), nucleus basalis (major site of acetylcholine [ACh] ascending projection neurons), and various brainstem regions that regulate neurotransmitter systems, autonomic function, innate psychomotor and visceromotor responses, and descending pain-regulation pathways. Central nucleus efferents are believed to consist of tonically active inhibitory projection neurons that activate their downstream targets when their activity is inhibited.30,31 (b)–(c) Studies of the amygdala in humans have typically considered it as a single functional unit, mainly due to its amorphous shape and relatively small size. Recent imaging studies have demonstrated the ability to differentiate the human amygdala in vivo into the 3 main nuclear complexes: basolateral, central (centromedial), and superficial (cortical).32

Figure 1

Figure 2 Prefrontal-Amygdala circuitry. Altered prefrontal amygdala circuitry has been implicated in the neurobiology of aggression. (a) Preclinical studies in primates and rodents have demonstrated that the portions of the prefrontal cortex most robustly interconnected, anatomically, with the amygdala include 2 basic regions: the posterior extent of the orbitofrontal cortex (pOFC) and the caudal portions of the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), roughly corresponding to the subgenual (sg)ACC and pregenual (pg)ACC. Anatomical connectivity between the amygdala and PFC, in general, decreases as it moves toward the dorsal and lateral aspects of the PFC (not depicted in this figure). Although there is significant bilateral anatomical connectivity between the amygdala and both the ACC and pOFC, studies in primates have also demonstrated relatively greater ACC-to-amygdala projections than amygdala-to-ACC projections; the pOFC, on the other hand, receives a greater number of projections from the amygdala compared to projections the pOFC sends to the amygdala. This has been considered to signify that the ACC is more of a sender of amygdala-PFC projections, whereas, the pOFC is more of a receiver.49,50 (b) These structural data in primates are broadly consistent with intrinsic functional connectivity studies of the amygdala complex in humans, although the latter provides, of course, relatively less anatomical resolution. As illustrated in (b), the subgenual/orbital portion of the medial PFC exhibits positive functional connectivity (red) with the basolateral amygdala complex, which suggests a predominantly feed-forward relationship. The pregenual medial PFC, on the other hand, exhibits negative functional connectivity with the basolateral amygdala complex (blue), which indicates a feed-back role.52 There is a general absence of functional connectivity with the more dorsal and lateral (not shown) PFC, which is similar to primate structural findings. (c)–(d) There are important anatomical differences in the termination patterns of projections from the OFC and ACC to the amygdala in the primate.51 Projection neurons from the ACC terminate broadly throughout the basal nucleus (as well as other amygdala nuclei), whereas OFC efferents are relatively unique in that they terminate among the intercalated masses or IMs (clusters of GABAergic inhibitory neurons that regulate central nucleus activity), as well as the central nucleus itself. Therefore, the pOFC may act as a direct arbiter of central nucleus activity, and therefore, determine the extent to which a stimulus representation is infused with a visceral/autonomic or “somatic” component. The ACC, on the other hand, may influence more broadly how sensory inputs to the amygdala are processed. It remains unclear how pregenual and subgenual portions of the ACC may differ in this respect, however.