Preventing the return of fear in humans using reconsolidation update mechanisms: A verification report of Schiller et al. (2010)

Spreading the reduction of fear: A narrative review of generalization of extinction learning in human fear conditioning

Extinction learning refers to a reduction in fear to a conditioned stimulus (CS) that previously signaled a threat, but now occurs without the expected threat. This mechanism is core to exposure-based treatments for anxiety-related disorders. Enhancing the generalization of extinction learning is crucial for improving treatment outcomes, as it helps reduce fear across a range of generalization stimuli (GSs) resembling the original fear-evoking CS. This narrative review identifies and covers three generalization of extinction learning models: 1) generalization of CS extinction learning, examining how extinction learning to the CS generalizes to novel GSs, 2) generalization of GS extinction learning, assessing how extinction learning to a GS generalizes to other novel GSs or the original CS, and 3) generalization of multiple stimuli extinction learning, where extinction learning involves multiple GSs (and sometimes the CS) and its effect on other novel stimuli. While extinction learning to the CS effectively generalizes to other stimuli, extinction learning to a GS or multiple GSs showed limited generalization to other novel GSs or the original CS. Since real-life exposure-based treatment rarely reproduces the CS, extinction learning involving only the GS(s) may better reflect clinical practice; poor generalization of GS(s) extinction learning may constitute another pathway of return of fear. This review also highlights various factors that influence generalization of extinction learning and call for future research to develop strategies for improving these processes, which can help inform exposure-based treatments.

Evidence for indirect strengthening through reactivation of contextually bound memories

Episodic memory is, by definition, associative; retrieving one event often triggers the recollection of another related event. Memory reactivation has been shown to strengthen reactivated memories, but its effects on related, non-reactivated memories remain unclear. This study investigated whether reactivation of a consolidated target memory could indirectly enhance the retention of peripheral information acquired in the same context. We hypothesized that reactivating a consolidated target memory would improve its retention and strengthen contextually associated memories. To test this, we conducted four experiments (n = 238) in which participants first learned face-name pairs (target memory) alongside everyday objects (peripheral memory). On Day 2, a subset of participants underwent a reactivation intervention using incomplete reminders of the target memory, while others received a control intervention. On day 3, memory performance for both the target and peripheral memories was assessed. Results revealed that reactivation significantly improved the retention of target and peripheral memories when acquired in the same context. However, when peripheral memories were learned in a different context, reactivation of the target memory did not produce the same indirect strengthening effect. These findings suggest that the indirect strengthening of consolidated memories through reactivation is context-dependent and may rely on the shared spatiotemporal acquisition context. This study provides new insights into the mechanisms of memory reactivation and its broader impact on related non-reactivated memories.

How Fear Memory is Updated: From Reconsolidation to Extinction?

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a psychiatric disorder caused by traumatic past experiences, rooted in the neurocircuits of fear memory formation. Memory processes include encoding, storing, and recalling to forgetting, suggesting the potential to erase fear memories through timely interventions. Conventional strategies such as medications or electroconvulsive therapy often fail to provide permanent relief and come with significant side-effects. This review explores how fear memory may be erased, particularly focusing on the mnemonic phases of reconsolidation and extinction. Reconsolidation strengthens memory, while extinction weakens it. Interfering with memory reconsolidation could diminish the fear response. Alternatively, the extinction of acquired memory could reduce the fear memory response. This review summarizes experimental animal models of PTSD, examines the nature and epidemiology of reconsolidation to extinction, and discusses current behavioral therapy aimed at transforming fear memories to treat PTSD. In sum, understanding how fear memory updates holds significant promise for PTSD treatment.

The impact of distal stress on the spontaneous recovery of conditioned defensive responses

Intense and chronic stress strengthens fear memories and increases the risk for mental disorders. Often stressful situations are experienced long before the appearance of the symptoms, but so far, little has been investigated on how distal stress alters fear memories. In a four-day paradigm, 131 healthy individuals were either assigned to the stress-group by means of the socially evaluated cold-pressor test (SECPT) or to the sham-group (control condition). Twenty-four hours later, participants underwent fear acquisition during which two shapes were presented. The first shape (conditioned stimulus, CS+) was associated with an electro-tactile stimulation (unconditioned stimulus, US), whereas the second shape (CS-) were presented alone. During extinction training, both shapes were presented while the US was omitted. To investigate if stress induction alters extinction recall differently depending on the passage of time, participants were tested either one day (recent) or 15 days (remote) after extinction training. Learning was quantified via subjective ratings, startle reflex and skin conductance response. While we found successful acquisition and extinction of the conditioned defensive responses, there was no effect of stress on these learning processes. Stress induction did not alter the spontaneous recovery of the conditioned defensive verbal responses but of the physiological responses as stressed individuals tested two weeks after extinction training showed startle potentiation to CS + vs. CS-. In conclusion, distal stress, even if mild, can strengthen fear memories and weaken extinction memory by the passage of time. This could be a possible mechanism facilitating the onset of stress-related and anxiety disorders.

Conflict Dynamics of Post-Retrieval Extinction: A Comparative Analysis of Unconditional and Conditional Reminders Using Skin Conductance Responses and EEG

The post-retrieval extinction paradigm, rooted in reconsolidation theory, holds promise for enhancing extinction learning and addressing anxiety and trauma-related disorders. This study investigates the impact of two reminder types, mild US-reminder (US-R) and CS-reminder (CS-R), along with a no-reminder extinction, on fear recovery prevention in a categorical fear conditioning paradigm. Scalp EEG recordings during reminder and extinction processes were conducted in a three-day design. Results show that the US-R group exhibits a distinctive extinction learning pattern, characterized by a slowed-down yet successful process and pronounced theta-alpha desynchronization (source-located in the prefrontal cortex) during CS processing, followed by enhanced synchronization (source-located in the anterior cingulate) after shock cancellation in extinction trials. These neural dynamics correlate with the subtle advantage of US-R in the Day 3 recovery test, presenting faster spontaneous recovery fading and generally lower fear reinstatement responses. Conversely, the CS reminder elicits CS-specific effects in later episodic tests. The unique neural features of the US-R group suggest a larger prediction error and subsequent effortful conflict learning processes, warranting further exploration.

Post-retrieval stress impairs subsequent memory depending on hippocampal memory trace reinstatement during reactivation

Upon retrieval, memories can become susceptible to meaningful events, such as stress. Post-retrieval memory changes may be attributed to an alteration of the original memory trace during reactivation-dependent reconsolidation or, alternatively, to the modification of retrieval-related memory traces that impact future remembering. Hence, how post-retrieval memory changes emerge in the human brain is unknown. In a 3-day functional magnetic resonance imaging study, we show that post-retrieval stress impairs subsequent memory depending on the strength of neural reinstatement of the original memory trace during reactivation, driven by the hippocampus and its cross-talk with neocortical representation areas. Comparison of neural patterns during immediate and final memory testing further revealed that successful retrieval was linked to pattern-dissimilarity in controls, suggesting the use of a different trace, whereas stressed participants relied on the original memory representation. These representation changes were again dependent on neocortical reinstatement during reactivation. Our findings show disruptive stress effects on the consolidation of retrieval-related memory traces that support future remembering.

Effects of the retrieval-extinction paradigm with abstract reminders on fear memory extinction

Reactivated fear memories may enter an unstable state that could be interrupted by behavioral interventions such as the retrieval-extinction procedure. Studies of pharmacological interventions have shown that retrieval cues are not necessarily an exact reduplication of initial conditioned stimuli (CSs); they can instead be abstract word cues. However, the effectiveness of using abstract reminder cues in behavioral intervention procedures remains unknown, as do the conditions under which they are effective. The typicality of CS and the abstraction level of reminders are also likely to be important in the paradigm but have not been investigated to date. Here, in three experiments (n = 107), we manipulate the fear conditioning process, including single CS-unconditioned stimulus (US) and multiple CS-US connections, as well as the CS typicality and abstraction level of reminder cues, to explore the conditions for adopting retrieval-extinction with abstract reminders. The results of Experiments 1 and 2 show that the abstract cue is ineffective for use as a reminder in the procedure; this is the case for single exemplar category learning and perceptual discriminative learning, independent of the typicality of CS+ or the abstraction level of reminder cues. Only the outcome of Experiment 3, which contains multiple CS-US connections, shows no indication of fear return. The limitations of the study and possible interpretations of the results are discussed.

Guided reactivation of personal phobic memories prior to exposure exercises prevents the renewal of fear responses in subjects with claustrophobic fears

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Basic research suggest behavioral strategies for interferencing the reconsolidation of fear memories to be a promising approach in reducing clinical fears. However, first clinical studies revealed mixed results highlighting the need to identify boundary conditions. We experimentally tested the specific hypothesis that post-retrieval threat exposure prevents context renewal usually observed in protocols without fear memory reactivation.

METHODS

In a preliminary investigation forty-three individuals with claustrophobic fears reactivated the individual phobic memory or not during a guided emotional imagery task and then performed standardized threat exposure to provide new information for updating the original memory. During retests seven and 28 days later, the context was different from that during treatment in half of the subjects.

RESULTS

In those who were guided, the fear memory was successfully reactivated as indexed by increased skin conductance level (SCL) during the imagery of personal scenes relative to neutral scenes. During retests the subjects of the memory non-activation group showed a return of reported fear after context change that, however, was not observed after post-retrieval exposure. In line, autonomic arousal (SCL) decreased over time in the memory reactivation group only if the context changed during retest.

LIMITATIONS

Limited sample size and the inclusion of an analog sample reduce the generalizability of the results.

CONCLUSIONS

The reactivation of fear memory prior to treatment through guided imagery of past personal phobic situations prevented contextual renewal of phobic fears which was observed in those subjects without reactivation of memory.

Reckoning With Our Crisis: An Agenda for the Field of Social and Personality Psychology

The replication crisis and credibility revolution in the 2010s brought a wave of doubts about the credibility of social and personality psychology. We argue that as a field, we must reckon with the concerns brought to light during this critical decade. How the field responds to this crisis will reveal our commitment to self-correction. If we do not take the steps necessary to address our problems and simply declare the crisis to be over or the problems to be fixed without evidence, we risk further undermining our credibility. To fully reckon with this crisis, we must empirically assess the state of the field to take stock of how credible our science actually is and whether it is improving. We propose an agenda for metascientific research, and we review approaches to empirically evaluate and track where we are as a field (e.g., analyzing the published literature, surveying researchers). We describe one such project (Surveying the Past and Present State of Published Studies in Social and Personality Psychology) underway in our research group. Empirical evidence about the state of our field is necessary if we are to take self-correction seriously and if we hope to avert future crises.

Appraising reconsolidation theory and its empirical validation

Re-exposure to elements of prior experiences can create opportunities for inducing amnesia for those events. The dominant theoretical framework posits that such re-exposure can result in memory destabilization, making the memory representation temporarily sensitive to disruption while it awaits reconsolidation. If true, such a mechanism that allows for memories to be permanently changed could have important implications for the treatment of several forms of psychopathology. However, there have been contradictory findings and elusive occurrences of replication failures within the "reconsolidation" field. Considering its potential relevance for clinical applications, the fact that this "hot" research area is being dominated by a single mechanistic theory, and the presence of unexplainable contradictory findings, we believe that it is both useful and timely to critically evaluate the reconsolidation framework. We discuss potential issues that may arise from how reconsolidation interference has typically been deducted from behavioral observations, and provide a principled assessment of reconsolidation theory that illustrates that the theory and its proposed boundary conditions are vaguely defined, which has made it close to impossible to refute reconsolidation theory. We advocate for caution, encouraging researchers not to blindly assume that a reconsolidation process must underlie their findings, and pointing out the risks of doing so. Finally, we suggest concrete theoretical and methodological advances that can promote a fruitful translation of reminder-dependent amnesia into clinical treatment.

Verbal manipulations of learning expectancy do not enhance reconsolidation

Objectives

Pharmacological studies using propranolol suggest that if reactivation signals that new information will be learned (i.e., there is an expectation for learning) reconsolidation can be enhanced. We examined if the verbal instructions to expect new learning will enhance reconsolidation of fear memories using the post-retrieval extinction paradigm.

Methods

On day one, participants (n = 48) underwent differential fear conditioning to two images (CS+ and CS-). On day two, participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups; groups one and two had their memory for the CS+ reactivated (i.e., a single presentation of the CS+) 10 minutes prior to extinction, whereas group three did not have their memory reactivated but went right to extinction (no reactivation group). One reactivation group was told that they would learn something new about the images (expectation for learning group), and the other group was told that they would not learn anything new (no expectation for learning group). On day three, return of fear was measured following reinstatement (i.e., four shocks). Fear potentiated startle (FPS) and skin conductance response (SCR) were measured throughout.

Results

There was evidence of fear acquisition for participants for SCR but not FPS. With regards to reconsolidation, SCR increased for the CS+ and CS-in all groups from the end of extinction to the beginning of re-extinction (i.e., return of fear). For FPS, post-hoc tests conducted on the sub-group of participants showing fear learning showed that FPS remained stable in the two reactivation groups, but increased to the CS+, but not the CS- in the no reactivation group.

Implications

These findings suggest that a verbal manipulation of the expectation for learning may not be salient enough to enhance reconsolidation. Results are discussed in relation to theories on differences in between SCR, as a measure of cognitive awareness, and FPS, as a measure of fear.

Continuous theta-burst stimulation over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex disrupts fear memory reconsolidation in humans

Continuous theta-burst stimulation (cTBS), a non-invasive brain stimulation technique, can induce long-lasting changes in synaptic plasticity, vital for memory reconsolidation. For this study, a total of 170 participants completed four experiments by a randomized controlled design. Succeeding fear conditioning, the subjects received cTBS over the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (dlPFC) or vertex (control) with or without exposure to the conditioned stimulus to reactivate the original fear memory, and then underwent fear response tests. Compared with cTBS over the vertex and without memory reactivation, only cTBS over the right dlPFC after reactivation decreased the fear response for both recent and remote fear memories. This procedure was effective only during the reconsolidation window. The disruptive effect of cTBS over the right dlPFC on fear memory reconsolidation was delay-dependent. These findings demonstrate that cTBS time-dependently and delay-dependently prevents the return of fear and may have clinical potential for treating fear-related disorders.

Does expressive writing or an instructional intervention reduce the impacts of test anxiety in a college classroom?

Test anxiety is a major concern in education because it causes uncomfortable feelings in test-anxious students and may reduce the validity of exam scores as a measure of learning. As such, brief and cost-effective interventions are necessary to minimize the negative impact of test anxiety on students’ academic performance. In the present experiment, we examine two such interventions: expressive writing (Experiment 1) and an instructional intervention (Experiment 2), with the latter developed from a similar intervention for stereotype threat. Across four authentic exams in a psychology class, students alternated between completing the intervention and a control task immediately before completing the exams. Neither intervention was effective at reducing test anxiety or improving exam performance. The present results suggest that these interventions may not be successful in addressing the impacts of test anxiety in all classroom settings.

Memories are not written in stone: Re-writing fear memories by means of non-invasive brain stimulation and optogenetic manipulations

The acquisition of fear associative memory requires brain processes of coordinated neural activity within the amygdala, prefrontal cortex (PFC), hippocampus, thalamus and brainstem. After fear consolidation, a suppression of fear memory in the absence of danger is crucial to permit adaptive coping behavior. Acquisition and maintenance of fear extinction critically depend on amygdala-PFC projections. The robust correspondence between the brain networks encompassed cortical and subcortical hubs involved into fear processing in humans and in other species underscores the potential utility of comparing the modulation of brain circuitry in humans and animals, as a crucial step to inform the comprehension of fear mechanisms and the development of treatments for fear-related disorders. The present review is aimed at providing a comprehensive description of the literature on recent clinical and experimental researches regarding the noninvasive brain stimulation and optogenetics. These innovative manipulations applied over specific hubs of fear matrix during fear acquisition, consolidation, reconsolidation and extinction allow an accurate characterization of specific brain circuits and their peculiar interaction within the specific fear processing.

Retrieval-extinction as a reconsolidation-based treatment for emotional disorders:Evidence from an extinction retention test shortly after intervention

The retrieval-extinction paradigm, a non-invasive memory intervention that is methodologically similar to exposure therapy, has significant clinical application prospects for targeting memory reconsolidation. However, it is difficult to distinguish whether the effect of preventing the return of fear by retrieval-extinction depends upon the reconsolidation-based mechanism or extinction-based mechanism. This study tested extinction retention shortly after intervention to determine whether retrieval-extinction is a reconsolidation-based approach or extinction-based approach as well as exploring the effect of sleep. In our experiment, the effects on fear conditional memory of standard extinction, retrieval-extinction, and extinction-retrieval were compared using the fear test at 3 h, 12 h without a night's sleep, and 12 h with a night's sleep after the intervention. The results showed that standard extinction and extinction-retrieval procedures reduce fear 3 h after intervention, while retrieval-extinction procedure reduces fear 12 h with a night's sleep after the intervention. The results suggest that standard extinction and extinction-retrieval create an extinction memory trace that competes with original memory trace, only retrieval-extinction update the original memory trace through memory reconsolidation. These findings provide solid evidence for the reconsolidation mechanism of the retrieval-extinction paradigm and highlight the effect of sleep on memory reconsolidation.

Understanding the dynamic and destiny of memories

Memory formation enables the retention of life experiences overtime. Based on previously acquired information, organisms can anticipate future events and adjust their behaviors to maximize survival. However, in an ever-changing environment, a memory needs to be malleable to maintain its relevance. In fact, substantial evidence suggests that a consolidated memory can become labile and susceptible to modifications after being reactivated, a process termed reconsolidation. When an extinction process takes place, a memory can also be temporarily inhibited by a second memory that carries information with opposite meaning. In addition, a memory can fade and lose its significance in a process known as forgetting. Thus, following retrieval, new life experiences can be integrated with the original memory trace to maintain its predictive value. In this review, we explore the determining factors that regulate the fate of a memory after its reactivation. We focus on three post-retrieval memory destinies (reconsolidation, extinction, and forgetting) and discuss recent rodent studies investigating the biological functions and neural mechanisms underlying each of these processes.

Perceptual Learning with Complex Objects: A Comparison between Full-Practice Training and Memory Reactivation

Perception improves with repeated exposure. Evidence has shown object recognition can be improved by training for multiple days in adults. Recently, a study of Amar-Halpert et al. (2017) has compared the learning effect of repetitive and brief, at-threshold training on a discrimination task and reported similar improvement in both groups. The finding is interpreted as evidence that memory reactivation benefits discrimination learning. This raises the question how this process might influence different perceptual tasks, including tasks with more complex visual stimuli. Here, this preregistered study investigates whether reactivation induces improvements in a visual object learning task that includes more complex visual stimuli. Participants were trained to recognize a set of objects during 5 d of training. After the initial training, a group was trained with repeated practice, the other a few near-threshold reactivation trials. In both groups, we found improved object recognition at brief exposure durations. Traditional intense training shows a daily improvement; however, the group with reactivation does not reach the same level of improvement. Our findings show that reactivation has a smaller effect relative to large amounts of practice.

Reactivation-Dependent Amnesia for Contextual Fear Memories: Evidence for Publication Bias

Research on memory reconsolidation has been booming in the last two decades, with numerous high-impact publications reporting promising amnestic interventions in rodents and humans. However, our own recently-published failed replication attempts of reactivation-dependent amnesia for fear memories in rats suggest that such amnestic effects are not always readily found and that they depend on subtle and possibly uncontrollable parameters. The discrepancy between our observations and published studies in rodents suggests that the literature in this field might be biased. The aim of the current study was to gauge the presence of publication bias in a well-delineated part of the reconsolidation literature. To this end, we performed a systematic review of the literature on reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents, followed by a statistical assessment of publication bias in this sample. In addition, relevant researchers were contacted for unpublished results, which were included in the current analyses. The obtained results support the presence of publication bias, suggesting that the literature provides an overly optimistic overall estimate of the size and reproducibility of amnestic effects. Reactivation-dependent amnesia for contextual fear memories in rodents is thus less robust than what is projected by the literature. The moderate success of clinical studies may be in line with this conclusion, rather than reflecting translational issues. For the field to evolve, replication and non-biased publication of obtained results are essential. A set of tools that can create opportunities to increase transparency, reproducibility and credibility of research findings is provided.

Investigating the frequency of intrusive memories after 24 hours using a visuospatial interference intervention: a follow-up and extension

BACKGROUND

There is a need for effective, low-cost, readily available measures for reducing trauma symptoms so that people exposed to potentially traumatic events can receive help more quickly. A previous study reported that performing an intervention including a visuospatial task shortly after a reminder of a series of unpleasant film clips seen 24 hours earlier reduced the number of intrusive memories over the following week.

OBJECTIVE

This study reports a follow-up and extension of the earlier promising finding. The prediction was that participants performing the visuospatial task immediately after the reminder would report fewer intrusions compared to three other groups who 1) performed no task, and novel conditions who 2) performed the task before the reminder, and 3) performed the task 90 minutes after the reminder.

METHOD

A trauma-analogue method was used, where students (N = 200) watched a series of short films with unpleasant material. Over the following week, they were asked to write down any intrusive memories they experienced in a diary. On the second day they returned to the lab and saw static reminders of the films. They were then randomly allocated to condition, recorded intrusive memories over the following days and returned to the lab for final testing on Day 8.

RESULTS

A total of 49 participants did not report any intrusions and were excluded from the analyses. Two more participants were excluded as outliers, leaving a final sample of n = 149. Despite using largely the same materials as the original study there were no significant differences in the number of intrusive memories between the four groups post intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

Possible explanations include the effect not being as robust as expected, a low number of intrusions across groups, baseline differences in attention, and minor but potentially important differences in procedure between this and the original study.

Human fear conditioning is moderated by stimulus contingency instructions

Recent research findings indicate that human fear conditioning is affected by instructions, particularly those concerning the contingency between the conditioned stimulus (CS) and the unconditioned stimulus (US). However, whether or not such instructions were provided to participants often remains unsaid in fear conditioning studies. In the current study (N = 102), we investigated whether conditioned fear acquisition depends on CS-US contingency instructions. Participants were randomly assigned to one of three groups. The first group was instructed about the precise CS-US contingency before conditioning. The second group was instructed to discover the CS-US contingency. The third group did not receive any contingency instructions. We found facilitated fear acquisition (using skin conductance and startle) and increased contingency awareness in the first and second group compared to the third group. Furthermore, contingency reversal instructions immediately reversed conditioned responses. Based on these results, we advise to systematically report the contingency instructions used in fear conditioning research.

Investigating the efficacy of the reminder-extinction procedure to disrupt contextual threat memories in humans using immersive Virtual Reality

Upon reactivation, consolidated memories can enter a temporary labile state and require restabilisation, known as reconsolidation. Interventions during this reconsolidation period can disrupt the reactivated memory. However, it is unclear whether different kinds of memory that depend on distinct brain regions all undergo reconsolidation. Evidence for reconsolidation originates from studies assessing amygdala-dependent memories using cue-conditioning paradigms in rodents, which were subsequently replicated in humans. Whilst studies providing evidence for reconsolidation of hippocampus-dependent memories in rodents have predominantly used context conditioning paradigms, studies in humans have used completely different paradigms such as tests for wordlists or stories. Here our objective was to bridge this paradigm gap between rodent and human studies probing reconsolidation of hippocampus-dependent memories. We modified a recently developed immersive Virtual Reality paradigm to test in humans whether contextual threat-conditioned memories can be disrupted by a reminder-extinction procedure that putatively targets reconsolidation. In contrast to our hypothesis, we found comparable recovery of contextual conditioned threat responses, and comparable retention of subjective measures of threat memory, episodic memory and exploration behaviour between the reminder-extinction and standard extinction groups. Our result provide no evidence that a reminder before extinction can prevent the return of context conditioned threat memories in humans.

Molecular Mechanisms of Reconsolidation-Dependent Memory Updating

Memory is not a stable record of experience, but instead is an ongoing process that allows existing memories to be modified with new information through a reconsolidation-dependent updating process. For a previously stable memory to be updated, the memory must first become labile through a process called destabilization. Destabilization is a protein degradation-dependent process that occurs when new information is presented. Following destabilization, a memory becomes stable again through a protein synthesis-dependent process called restabilization. Much work remains to fully characterize the mechanisms that underlie both destabilization and subsequent restabilization, however. In this article, we briefly review the discovery of reconsolidation as a potential mechanism for memory updating. We then discuss the behavioral paradigms that have been used to identify the molecular mechanisms of reconsolidation-dependent memory updating. Finally, we outline what is known about the molecular mechanisms that support the memory updating process. Understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying reconsolidation-dependent memory updating is an important step toward leveraging this process in a therapeutic setting to modify maladaptive memories and to improve memory when it fails.

No persistent attenuation of fear memories in humans: A registered replication of the reactivation-extinction effect

It has been proposed that memory retrieval can destabilize consolidated memories, after which they need to be reconsolidated in order to be retained. The presentation of relevant information during memory reconsolidation could then result in the modification of a destabilized memory trace, by allowing the memory trace to be updated before being reconsolidated. In line with this idea, Schiller et al. (2010) have demonstrated that memory retrieval shortly before extinction training can prevent the later recovery of conditioned fear responding that is observed after regular extinction training. Those findings have been the subject of considerable controversy, due in part to theoretical reasons but also due to a number of failures to obtain similar results in conceptual replication attempts. Here, we report the results of a highly powered, direct, independent replication of the critical conditions of Schiller et al. (2010, Experiment 1). Due to misrepresentation of the exclusion criteria in the original Schiller et al. (2010) report, data collection was considerably delayed. When we eventually managed to attain our pre-registered sample size, we found that we could not observe any benefit of reactivation-extinction over regular extinction training in preventing recovery of conditioned fear. The results of the present study, along with the mixed findings in the literature and the misreporting in Schiller et al. (2010), give cause to question whether there is robust evidence that reactivation-extinction prevents the return of fear in humans.