Third, we must consider the limitations of our phenotypic assessments. With the exception of reward-related VS reactivity measures, all other variables relied upon self-report. It is particularly important to note that retrospective recall of stress, occurring either recently or early in life, may encompass errors or be influenced by current mood or perception (Monroe, 2008). However, reports have shown convergent validity between CTQ scores and clinician-rated childhood abuse interviews (Scher et al. 2001). Another consideration is that while our blocked fMRI paradigm increases power to measure VS reactivity, it does so at the cost of specificity (e.g. separating anticipation of reward from outcome). This is particularly important in light of observations that reward processing is not a monolithic phenomenon (Berridge et al. 2009) and can be dissected into anticipatory, consummatory, and learning components. As such, we are unable to ascertain whether these effects may be predominantly the result of differences in specific phases of reward processing or reward learning.
