PosterPDF Available

Association between Sensory Processing Sensitivity and the 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype

Authors:

Abstract

Associations between the common polymorphism in the serotonin transporter (5-HTT) promoter 5-HTTLPR and the personality traits Neuroticism and Harm Avoidance are equivocal. The temperamental trait Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS), which is characterized by increased sensitivity to environmental stimuli (Aron and Aron, 1997) and is related to Neuroticism and Openness (Smolewska et al., 2006), may describe an underlying characteristic more directly associated with 5-HTTLPR genotype. High levels of SPS are found in 15-20% of the population and have in fMRI studies been associated with enhanced neural processing of detailed visual stimuli (Jagiellowicz et al., 2011) and increased neural activation in response to happy and sad faces (Acevedo et al., 2010). Several defining characteristics of SPS, as reflected by items on the self-report questionnaire, are similar to physiological characteristics found in 5-HTTLPR short allele carriers, including increased brain activation in response to emotional stimuli (Canli et al., 2005), increased acoustic startle response (Brocke et al., 2006), and increased cortisol response to social evaluation (Way et al., 2010). High levels of SPS may reflect an endophenotype associated with the 5-HTTLPR short/short genotype
Center for integrated
molecular brain imaging
Association between Sensory Processing Sensitivity
and the 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
Cecilie L. Licht1, Erik L. Mortensen2, Gitte M. Knudsen1
1Neurobiology Research Unit and Center for Integrated Molecular Brain Imaging (Cimbi), Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Denmark
2Department of Health Psychology, Institute of Public Health, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Introduction
Associations between the common polymorphism in the
serotonin transporter (5-HTT) promoter 5-HTTLPR and the
personality traits Neuroticism and Harm Avoidance are
equivocal. The temperamental trait Sensory Processing
Sensitivity (SPS), which is characterized by increased
sensitivity to environmental stimuli (Aron and Aron, 1997)
and is related to Neuroticism and Openness (Smolewska et
al., 2006), may describe an underlying characteristic more
directly associated with 5-HTTLPR genotype. High levels of
SPS are found in 15-20% of the population and have in
fMRI studies been associated with enhanced neural
processing of detailed visual stimuli (Jagiellowicz et al.,
2011) and increased neural activation in response to happy
and sad faces (Acevedo et al., 2010). Several defining
characteristics of SPS, as reflected by items on the self-
report questionnaire, are similar to physiological
characteristics found in 5-HTTLPR short allele carriers,
including increased brain activation in response to
emotional stimuli (Canli et al., 2005), increased acoustic
startle response (Brocke et al., 2006), and increased
cortisol response to social evaluation (Way et al., 2010).
High levels of SPS may reflect an endophenotype
associated with the 5-HTTLPR short/short genotype.
Methods
Participants
Two-hundred healthy adult individuals (aged 18-88), included in the Cimbi
database between 2000 and 2010, completed NEO-PI-R and TCI
personality batteries at the time of inclusion. Blood samples were collected
and genotypes for the 5-HTTLPR polymorphism determined. In 2010, the
cohort (n = 169, 58.6% male) completed the questionnaires Highly
Sensitive Person (HSP) Scale and the Symptom Checklist-90R (SCL-
90R).
Questionnaires
NEO-PI-R – The Revised NEO Personality Inventory. A 240-item self-
report questionnaire providing a measure of the Five Factor Model:
Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and
Conscientiousness (Costa and McCrae, 1992).
Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI). A 240-item questionnaire
providing a measure of four dimensions of temperament (Harm
Avoidance, Novelty Seeking, Reward Dependence, and Persistence) and
three of character (Cloninger et al., 1994).
Highly Sensitive Person (HSP) Scale. A 27-item self-report questionnaire
providing a measure of Sensory Processing Sensitivity (HSP score) (Aron
and Aron, 1997) and the three facets Aesthetic Sensitivity (AES), Ease of
Excitation (EOE), and Low Sensory Threshold (LST) (Smolewska et al.,
2006). Examples of questions: ‘Do other people’s moods affect you?’, ‘Do
you startle easily?’, and ‘Does being very hungry create a strong reaction
in you, disrupting your concentration or mood?’ Items are rated on a 1-7
Likert scale, giving total scores in the range of 27-189. The present
dataset has scores in the range 27-138, mean ± SD of 92.6 ± 19.1, and a
Cronbach’s α of 0.86.
Revised Hopkins Symptom Checklist (SCL-90R). A 90-item self-report
questionnaire providing a measure of symptoms of distress and
psychopathology within the past week consisting of a Global Severity
Index (GSI) and scores for nine sub-scales of psychopathology (Derogatis
LR, 1994).
5-HTTLPR Genotyping
5-HTT gene-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR, rs4795541). A 44 bp
insertion/deletion in the promoter region of the 5-HTT gene giving rise to
short (s) and long (l) alleles. Determined with a TaqMan 5’-exonuclease
allelic discrimination assay and ABI 7500 multiplex PCR (Applied
Biosystems). The three genotypes: l/l (n = 55, 32.5%), s/l (n = 82, 48.5%),
and s/s (n = 32, 18.9%) were in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium (s allele
frequency: 43%, Χ
2
= 0.021, p = 0.883).
Statistical analysis
Performed in GraphPad Prism 5.04, GraphPad InStat 3.10, and
STATA/MP 10.1.
Conclusions
Sensory Processing Sensitivity was positively correlated
with female gender, psychological distress, and the
personality traits Neuroticism, Harm Avoidance, and
Openness, and negatively correlated with Extraversion.
Higher levels of Sensory Processing Sensitivity were
associated with the serotonin transporter 5-HTTLPR
short/short genotype, when taking gender, age,
psychological distress, and the personality traits
Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness into account.
In particular, this association was evident for Ease of
Excitation, a facet of Sensory Processing Sensitivity.
Neuroticism and Harm Avoidance were not associated
with the 5-HTTLPR short/short genotype, or with 5-
HTTLPR short allele carrier status.
Thus, the trait Sensory Processing Sensitivity describes a
psychological profile associated with homozygotic status
of a common polymorphism in the serotonin system.
References
Acevedo B, Aron A, and Aron E (2010). American Psychological Association Annual Convention, Symposium 2273.
Aron EN and Aron A (1997). J Pers Soc Psychol 73, 345-68.
Brocke B, Armbruster D, Muller J, Hensch T, Jacob CP, Lesch KP et al. (2006). Mol Psychiatry 11, 1106-12.
Canli T, Omura K, Haas BW, Fallgatter A, Constable RT, and Lesch KP (2005). PNAS 102, 12224-9.
Cloninger CR, Przybeck TR, Svrakic DM, and Wetzel RD (1994). Center for Psychobiology of Personality, Missouri.
Costa PT and McCrae RR (1992). Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa, Florida.
Derogatis LR (1994). Administration, Scoring, and Procedures Manual, 3rd ed. National Computer Systems,
Minneapolis, Minnesota.
Jagiellowicz J, Xu X, Aron A, Aron E, Cao G, Feng T, and Weng X (2011). SCAN 6, 38-47.
Smolewska KA, McCabe SB, and Woody EZ (2006). Pers Indiv Differ 40, 1269-79.
Way BM and Taylor SE (2010). Biol Psychiatry 67, 487-92.
Acknowledgements
The Lundbeck Foundation and the Sawmill Owner Jeppe Juhl and Wife Ovita
Juhl Memorial Foundation are acknowledged for financial support.
Contact: cecilie.licht@nru.dk
Figure 1. Influence of gender and psychological distress on
Sensory Processing Sensitivity. A) Females have higher HSP
score than males (99.8 ± 2.2 vs. 87.6 ± 1.8, p < 0.0001, Student’s t
test, n = 169). B) Global Severity Index (GSI) on the SCL-90R
measure of psychological distress is positively correlated with HSP
score (Spearman’s r = 0.42, p < 0.0001, n = 165).
Figure 2. Correlations between Sensory Processing Sensitivity and associated
personality traits. A) Neuroticism is correlated with HSP score (Pearson’s r = 0.39, p <
0.0001). B) Harm Avoidance is correlated with HSP score (Spearman’s r = 0.40, p < 0.0001).
C) Extraversion is negatively correlated with HSP score (Pearson’s r = -0.17, p = 0.025). D)
Openness is correlated with HSP score (Pearson’s r = 0.18, p = 0.023). Reward Dependence
is correlated with HSP score (Pearson’s r = 0.26, p = 0.0007, data not shown). n = 164-165.
Figure 3. Sensory Processing Sensitivity is not associated with 5-HTTLPR Short/
Short Genotype when taking gender, age, and psychological distress into account.
Partial regression plot of HSP score vs. 5-HTTLPR s/s genotype (s/s = 1, s/l or l/l = 0),
(pcorr = 0.15, p = 0.056). Model: adj. R2 = 27.4%, n = 164. 5-HTTLPR s/s: coeff. = 6.21, se
= 3.23.
Table 1. Comparison of associations of Sensory Processing Sensitivity, Neuroticism,
and Harm Avoidance with 5-HTTLPR Short allele. Values are partial correlation
coefficients for 5-HTTLPR short allele status with each personality trait taking gender, age
(SPS only), and psychological distress (SCL-90R GSI) into account. Models in bottom
section include the personality traits listed in parentheses to test each personality trait’s
association with 5-HTTLPR s/s genotype independent of associated traits. n = 161-164. *p <
0.05.
Table 2. Correlations between Sensory Processing Sensitivity facets
and personality traits of the Five Factor Model. The facets Ease of
Excitation (EOE) and Low Sensory Threshold (LST) are correlated with
Neuroticism and negatively correlated with Extraversion. The facet Aesthetic
Sensitivity (AES) is correlated with Openness. Values are Pearson’s
correlation coefficients. aSpearman correlation coefficient. n = 165. * p <
0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Total HSP AES EOE LST
Neuroticism 0.39*** 0.10 0.42*** 0.30***
Extraversion -0.17* 0.15 -0.24** -0.27***
Openness 0.18* 0.47*** -0.01 -0.08
Conscientiousness -0.01a-0.02a-0.04a-0.10a
Agreeableness 0.12a0.07a0.06a0.17a*
5-HTTLPR
Short/Short
5-HTTLPR Short
Allele Carrier
Sensory Processing Sensitivity 0.15 (p = 0.056) na
Neuroticism -0.04 (p = 0.628) 0.03 (p = 0.704)
Harm Avoidance -0.10 (p = 0.202) -0.10 (p = 0.210)
Sensory Processing Sensitivity (Neuroticism) 0.18 (p = 0.026)* na
Sensory Processing Sensitivity (Harm Avoidance) 0.18 (p = 0.025)* na
Neuroticism (Sensory Processing Sensitivity) -0.08 (p = 0.325) na
Harm Avoidance (Sensory Processing Sensitivity) -0.15 (p = 0.066) na
Sensory Processing Sensitivity (Neu., Ext., Ope.) 0.20 (p = 0.011)* na
0 50 100 150
0
50
100
150 r = 0.39
p <0.0001
SPS versus Neuroticism
HSP Score
Neuroticism
A
0 50 100 150
0
10
20
30 r = 0.40
p < 0.0001
SPS versus Harm Avoidance
HSP Score
Harm Avoidance
B
0 50 100 150
0
50
100
150
200 r = - 0.17
p = 0.025
SPS versus Extraversion
HSP Score
Extraversion
C
0 50 100 150
0
50
100
150
200 r = 0.18
p = 0.023
SPS versus Openness
HSP Score
Openness
D
Figure 4. Sensory Processing Sensitivity is associated with 5-HTTLPR Short/Short
Genotype when taking gender, age, psychological distress, and the personality traits
Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness into account. Partial regression plot of HSP
score vs. 5-HTTLPR s/s genotype (s/s = 1, s/l or l/l = 0), (pcorr = 0.20, p = 0.011). Model:
adj. R2 = 38.4%, n = 161. 5-HTTLPR s/s: coeff. = 7.56, se = 2.93.
Figure 5. Ease of Excitation (EOE) is associated with 5-HTTLPR Short/
Short Genotype when taking gender, age, and psychological distress
into account. Partial regression plot of EOE score vs. 5-HTTLPR s/s
genotype (s/s = 1, s/l or l/l = 0), (pcorr = 0.17, p = 0.036). Model: adj. R2 =
30.0%, n = 164. 5-HTTLPR s/s: coeff. = 3.25, se = 1.54.
Figure 6. Ease of Excitation (EOE) is associated with 5-HTTLPR Short/
Short Genotype when taking gender, age, psychological distress, and
the personality traits Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Openness into
account. Partial regression plot of EOE score vs. 5-HTTLPR s/s genotype
(s/s = 1, s/l or l/l = 0), (pcorr = 0.23, p = 0.004). Model: adj. R2 = 40.4%, n =
161. 5-HTTLPR s/s: coeff. = 4.09, se = 1.41.
SPS and Gender
Male Female
0
50
100
150
p < 0.0001
HSP Score
A
B
0 50 100 150
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
r = 0.42
p < 0.0001
SPS and Psychological Distress
HSP Score
SCL-90R GSI
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40
Residual HSP Score
-.5 0 .5 1
Residual 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
Pcorr = 0.15 p = 0.056
Gender_Age_SCL-90R GSI
HSP Score and 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
-40 -20 0 20 40
Residual HSP Score
-.5 0 .5 1
Residual 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
Pcorr = 0.20 p = 0.011
Gender_Age_SCL-90R GSI_NEO
HSP Score and 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
-20 -10 0 10 20
Residual EOE Score
-.5 0 .5 1
Residual 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
Pcorr = 0.23 p = 0.004
Gender_Age_SCL-90R GSI_NEO
EOE Score and 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
-20 -10 0 10 20
Residual EOE Score
-.5 0 .5 1
Residual 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
Pcorr = 0.17 p = 0.036
Gender_Age_SCL-90R GSI
EOE Score and 5-HTTLPR Short/Short Genotype
... More recent research identifies a genetic basis to high SPS, suggesting potential adaptive benefits which may explain its evolutionary persistence (Jagiellowicz, Xu, Aron, Aron, Cao, Feng, and Weng 2011;Licht, Mortensen and Knudsen 2011;Acevedo, Aron, Pospos and Jesson 2018). Despite limitations, those high in the trait: 'will be more aware of harm, threats and foes…Thus, they will have the advantage of knowing how to best respond to the environment, as well as being able to share this information with others. ...
... In three of Aron and Aron's original seven studies women scored significantly higher than men on the HSP scale (1997: 356). The correlation of SPS with female gender has been confirmed in later research(Benham 2006;Licht et al 2011) despite Aron's contention that HSPs are fairly evenly distributed between females and males (1996: iii). She claims boys are more likely to suppress the trait as they grow up because high sensitivity does not conform to Western societal scripts for maleness(ibid, p. 73). ...
... Further research should determine whether this is an artefact of a relatively small sample. Given the higher SPS scores for females in other studies(Benham 2006;Licht et al 2011) it would not be surprising if this also held true for mediators. Picard found that female mediators used more 'socioemotional patterns of meaning when describing mediation, while males used far more "pragmatic traits"' (2000:199). ...
Article
Full-text available
Are mediators born or made? Is there such a thing as a ‘natural mediator’? Bowling and Hoffman’s influential (2003) collection, ‘Bringing Peace into the Room,’ considers: ‘How the personal qualities of the mediator impact the process of conflict resolution.’ These questions are troubling for practitioners and educators. Does training matter, or are such qualities, or traits, innate? ‘Trait’ can be defined as ‘A distinguishing quality or characteristic, typically belonging to a person’ (Lexico 2020). Are some individuals drawn to conflict resolution work because they already possess these qualities? Or because they seek them? This article contributes to the debate by reporting on a study into the prevalence of a particular trait, sensory processing sensitivity, in a sample of 181 English-speaking mediators. The study found that these mediators were significantly more likely to possess the trait than the average population. The implications for practice and training are discussed.
... En cuanto a la relación estadísticamente significativa entre la SPS y el género, tras los segundos análisis de submuestras homogéneas, con puntuaciones más altas en el grupo de las mujeres que en el de los hombres, confirmaría los resultados de otros estudios (Aron & Aron, 1997;Aron, Aron & Jagiellowicz, 2012;Licht et al., 2011;Trå et al., 2022) donde también las mujeres puntuaban más alto que los hombres en esta escala. Aunque, esta diferencia podría explicarse en parte por los estereotipos sociales que atribuyen a la mujer una mayor sensibilidad emocional (Batson et al., 1987), para Trå et al. (2022) esta alta sensibilidad de procesamiento sensorial en las mujeres supondría una ventaja adaptativa filogenética, por su papel en la maternidad. ...
Article
Full-text available
El impacto que viene teniendo la Covid-19 en la salud mental de la población joven es mayor que en otras edades, por lo que en este trabajo de tipo cuantitativo se quiere estudiar tras dos años de pandemia algunas variables psicosociales de fortaleza vs vulnerabilidad en adultos jóvenes. Para ello se entrevistó a 162 estudiantes universitarios (M = 20.31, DT = 1.97, 79% mujeres) que voluntariamente, además de aportar sus variables sociodemográficas, respondieron a tres escalas, la primera de afrontamiento centrado en el sentido (MCCS, Eisenbeck et al., 2021), la segunda de sensibilidad de procesamiento sensorial (SPS-S, Chacón et al., 2021), y la tercera de resiliencia (CD-RISC, Serrano-Parra et al., 2012). Los datos se analizaron con pruebas descriptivas y pruebas inferenciales (U de Mann Whitney, t de Student, Spearman). Los resultados mostraron unos niveles medios tanto en afrontamiento como en SPS, y un nivel medio-alto en resiliencia. La variable sociodemográfica de género resultó estadísticamente significativa con la SPS y con la resiliencia, siendo las mujeres más altamente sensibles (PAS) y menos resilientes que los hombres. También se dio una correlación estadísticamente significativa entre la SPS, la resiliencia y el género, así como entre la resiliencia, el afrontamiento y el género. Como conclusión general esta muestra presenta más fortaleza que vulnerabilidad psicosocial en el segundo año de la pandemia por Covid-19, deduciendo una cierta adaptación a dicha situación, y señalando la posibilidad de intervenciones de fortalecimiento con esas variables desde una perspectiva de género frente a situaciones futuras de máximo estrés.
... Gender differences are reported in SPS; women usually have higher HSP-scores than men (Benham, 2006;Chac on et al., 2021;Konrad & Herzberg, 2017;Licht et al., 2011). This is not surprising, since women typically have higher scores in neuroticism, agreeableness, and openness to feelings, lower scores in assertiveness and openness to ideas (Costa et al., 2001) and they are more relation-oriented and less thing-oriented than men (Lippa, 2010). ...
Article
Full-text available
Sensory Processing Sensitivity (SPS) is a heritable personality related trait which includessensitivity to a variety of stimuli, emotional, cognitive, and behavioural reactions such asstrong positive and negative emotional responses, deep cognitive processing of stimuli, andempathic behaviour. Two studies are reported. Study 1 investigated the factor structure ofthe Highly Sensitive Person scale (HSP) and gender differences in HSP. Study 2 describeddifferences in Big Five personality traits between two HSP groups. Study 1 comprised asample of adults, mostly university students, matched on gender (N men ¼ 548, N women¼ 548; total N ¼ 1096). Study 2 was based on a sample consisting of a High (N ¼ 164) andLow (N ¼ 164) HSP group also matched on gender (N men ¼ 82 and N women ¼ 82 inboth groups; total N ¼ 328). There were no age differences between men and women inthe two samples. Results from Study 1 showed a correlated three-factor solution: The firstfactor reflected excitability, easily aroused, negative emotional reactivity, frustration,avoidance of upsetting situations and childhood shyness. Factor 2 comprised low sensorythreshold and sensory discomfort. Factor 3 captured intensity of aesthetic reactions,preoccupation with details in the environment, and socio-emotional sensitivity. Genderdifferences were found, women had elevated HSP scores on all scales, also when controlledfor personality traits. Study 2 showed that the highly sensitive individuals had a uniquepersonality trait profile compared to low sensitives. They had higher scores on neuroticism,agreeableness, openness, and lower scores on conscientiousness. There were no differencesin extraversion i.e., there was no tendency towards introversion among the high sensitives
Article
Sensory Processing Sensitivity – Significance of the Trait for Diagnostics and Psychotherapy with Children and Adolescents Sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) is a temperamental trait that is partly hereditary. It is characterised by a general heightened sensitivity to internal and external stimuli, regardless of whether the stimuli are positive or negative. Consequently, heightened sensitivity can have both beneficial and detrimental effects on mental health and can act as both a protective and a risk factor, depending on the nature of the relevant infuences. Highly sensitive people (HSP) with adverse childhood experiences are correspondingly more vulnerable to stress-related symptoms such as burnout, anxiety disorders and depression. In line with the increased responsiveness to supportive stimuli, initial studies show an increased effectiveness in the context of prevention, for example with regard to depression, as well as in relation to psychotherapy in highly sensitive children and adolescents. This indicates both a possibly increased vulnerability to adverse experiences and a potentially higher response to prevention and intervention by highly sensitive individuals. This review article will address this topic and discuss some implications for diagnostics and psychotherapy with children and adolescents.
Book
Children's temperament is a central individual characteristic that has significant implications, directly and indirectly, for their social, emotional, behavioral, cognitive, and health outcomes, through its evocative and moderating effects on other social and contextual influences. Accounting for these contextual influences is critical to articulating the role of temperament in children's development. This Element defines temperament and describes its roots in neurobiological systems as well as its relevance to children's developmental outcomes, with a focus on understanding the influence of temperament in children's social and environmental contexts. It covers key developmental periods, situating the contribution of temperament to children's development in complex and changing processes and contexts from infancy through adolescence. The Element concludes by underscoring the value of integrating contextual, relational, and dynamic systems approaches and pointing to future directions in temperament research and application.
Article
Full-text available
Reactions to stimuli vary from person to person. The same stimulus has different effects depending on the perception of different people and the physical and mental states they are in. Considering this difference, situations can be seen in which a person perceives a specific stimulus or group of stimuli as negative and disturbing for themselves. In particular, people with high levels of sensory processing sensitivity feel the negative effects of stimuli more intensely both in terms of their internal processes (hunger, pain, sadness, stress, etc.) and the situation of the physical environment (loud noise, bright light, pungent odor, etc.) which they are in. On the other hand, the existence of situations where sensory processing sensitivity has a positive effect is also noticeable. In this context, the relationship between sensory processing sensitivity and personality traits is examined. The concept of personality is explained in different ways by many different theorists in the international literature. In order to avoid confusion that may arise in the definition and understanding of personality traits, in this review study, personality traits are examined on the basis of the Five Factor Personality Theory. Within the framework of the personality definition of the Five Factor Personality Theory, The relationship between five basic personality traits and sensory processing sensitivity is examined by also considering the subdimensions of each five personality traits.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.