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

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.

Investigating the effect of continuous and partial reinforcement in conceptual fear generalization

Fear generalization plays a major role in the acquisition and maintenance of anxiety disorders. In fear generalization, conditioned fear responses are observed for novel stimuli sharing perceptually or conceptually similar properties with the conditioned stimulus (CS). The reinforcement rates of the unconditioned stimulus (UCS) impact fear acquisition and generalization. Fear generalization can be studied using the category-based conditioning paradigm, where individuals are conditioned to members of a category rather than a single stimulus. The current study explored the effect of UCS reinforcement (i.e., continuous and partial) on conceptual fear generalization due to category-based similarity using a visual aversive UCS. The CSs were exemplars from four categories, i.e., animals, insects, household appliances, and tools. Thirty healthy participants underwent fear acquisition with exemplars from the four stimulus categories, presented with varying levels of UCS reinforcement (100%, 62.5%, and 37.5%). Subsequently, fear generalization was tested with novel unreinforced exemplars from each category. A significant effect of reinforcement on the UCS expectancy and CS-UCS contingency ratings was observed. UCS expectancy ratings increased with increasing certainty of UCS occurrence in the generalization phase. Our results may help to understand how fear generalizes to conceptually related stimuli based on the certainty of the UCS occurrence.

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.

Fear attenuation collaborations to optimize translation

Here, we describe the efforts we dedicated to the challenge of modifying entrenched emotionally laden memories. In recent years, through a number of collaborations and using a combination of behavioral, molecular, and computational approaches, we: (a) developed novel approaches to fear attenuation that engage mechanisms that differ from those engaged during extinction (Monfils), (b) examined whether our approaches can generalize to other reinforcers (Lee, Gonzales, Chaudhri, Cofresi, and Monfils), (c) derived principled explanations for the differential outcomes of our approaches (Niv, Gershman, Song, and Monfils), (d) developed better assessment metrics to evaluate outcome success (Shumake and Monfils), (e) identified biomarkers that can explain significant variance in our outcomes of interest (Shumake and Monfils), and (f) developed better basic research assays and translated efforts to the clinic (Smits, Telch, Otto, Shumake, and Monfils). We briefly highlight each of these milestones and conclude with final remarks and extracted principles. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

Carbon Dioxide Reactivity Differentially Predicts Fear Expression After Extinction and Retrieval-Extinction in Rats

Background

Cues present during a traumatic event may result in persistent fear responses. These responses can be attenuated through extinction learning, a core component of exposure therapy. Exposure/extinction is effective for some people, but not all. We recently demonstrated that carbon dioxide (CO2) reactivity predicts fear extinction memory and orexin activation and that orexin activation predicts fear extinction memory, which suggests that a CO2 challenge may enable identification of whether an individual is a good candidate for an extinction-based approach. Another method to attenuate conditioned responses, retrieval-extinction, renders the original associative memory labile via distinct neural mechanisms. The purpose of the current study was to examine whether we could replicate previous findings that retrieval-extinction is more effective than extinction at preventing the return of fear and that CO2 reactivity predicts fear memory after extinction. We also examined whether CO2 reactivity predicts fear memory after retrieval-extinction.

Methods

Male rats first underwent a CO2 challenge and fear conditioning and were assigned to receive either standard extinction (n = 28) or retrieval-extinction (n = 28). Then, they underwent a long-term memory (LTM) test and a reinstatement test.

Results

We found that retrieval-extinction resulted in lower freezing during extinction, LTM, and reinstatement than standard extinction. Using the best subset approach to linear regression, we found that CO2 reactivity predicted LTM after extinction and also predicted LTM after retrieval-extinction, although to a lesser degree.

Conclusions

CO2 reactivity could be used as a screening tool to determine whether an individual may be a good candidate for an extinction-based therapeutic approach.

Preventing fear return in humans: Music-based intervention during reactivation-extinction paradigm

In several research studies, the reactivation extinction paradigm did not effectively prevent the return of fear if administered without any intervention technique. Therefore, in this study, the authors hypothesized that playing music (high valence, low arousal) during the reconsolidation window may be a viable intervention technique for eliminating fear-related responses. A three-day auditory differential fear conditioning paradigm was used to establish fear conditioning. Participants were randomly assigned into three groups, i.e., one control group, standard extinction (SE), and two experimental groups, reactivation extinction Group (RE) and music reactivation extinction (MRE), of twenty participants in each group. Day 1 included the habituation and fear acquisition phases; on Day 2 (after 24 hours), the intervention was conducted, and re-extinction took place on Day 3. Skin conductance responses were used as the primary outcome measure. Results indicated that the MRE group was more effective in reducing fear response than the RE and SE groups in the re-extinction phase. Furthermore, there was no significant difference observed between SE and RE groups. This is the first study known to demonstrate the effectiveness of music intervention in preventing the return of fear in a healthy individual. Therefore, it might also be employed as an intervention strategy (non-pharmacological approach) for military veterans, in emotion regulation, those diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, and those suffering from specific phobias.

Memory persistence: from fundamental mechanisms to translational opportunities

Memory persistence is a double edge sword. Persistence of adaptive memories is essential for survival and even determines who we are. Neurodegenerative conditions with significant memory loss such as Alzheimer's disease, testify how defects of memory persistence have severe and irreversible effects on personality, among other symptoms. Yet, maintenance of overly strong maladaptive memories underlies highly debilitating psychiatric conditions including post-traumatic stress disorder, specific phobia, substance dependence and binge eating disorder. Here we review the neurobiological mechanisms supporting memory formation, persistence, inhibition and forgetting. We then shift the focus to how such mechanisms have been exploited to alter the persistence of laboratory-generated memories in human healthy volunteers as a proof of concept. Finally, we review the effect of behavioural and pharmacological interventions in anxiety and addiction disorder patients, highlighting key findings, gaps, and future directions for basic and translational research.

Reminder-dependent alterations in long-term declarative memory expression

The reminder of a previously-learned memory can render that memory vulnerable to disruption or change in expression. Such memory alterations have been viewed as supportive of the framework of memory reconsolidation. However, alternative interpretations and inconsistencies in the replication of fundamental findings have raised questions particularly in the domain of human declarative memory. Here we present a series of related experiments, all of which involve the learning of a declarative memory, followed 1-2 days later by memory reminder. Post-reminder learning of interfering material did result in modulation of subsequent recall at test, but the precise manifestation of that interference effect differed across experiments. With post-reminder performance of a visuospatial task, a quantitative impairment in test recall performance was observed within a visual list-learning paradigm, but not in a foreign vocabulary learning paradigm. These results support the existence of reminder-induced memory processes that can lead to the alteration of subsequent memory performance by interfering tasks. However, it remains unclear whether these effects are reflective of modulation or impairment of the putative memory reconsolidation process.

Manipulating critical memory periods to treat psychiatry disorders

The persistence of pathological memory is the basis of several psychiatric disorders. Memory retrieval induces "reconsolidation", a time interval during which the original memory becomes labile and destabilized. Time- and retrieval-dependent processes and memory reconsolidation are critical periods for memory interference. Modulating memory reconsolidation has received considerable research attention as a treatment protocol for several psychiatric conditions such as posttraumatic stress disorder, addiction, anxiety, and trauma-related disorders. This specific time window provides an opportunity for intervention regarding mental diseases. This article reviews the effect of modulating memory reconsolidation using behavioral-, brain stimulation-, and pharmacological-based interventions, which may help bridge the gap between intervention in laboratories and application in clinical practice. The potential advantages, limitations, challenges, and opportunities for memory reconsolidation manipulations were discussed.

Face your fears: attenuating remote fear memories by reconsolidation-updating

Traumatic events generate some of the most enduring memories, yet little is known about how long-lasting fear memories can be attenuated. In this review, we collect the surprisingly sparse evidence on remote fear memory attenuation from both animal and human research. What is becoming apparent is twofold: although remote fear memories are more resistant to change compared with recent ones, they can nevertheless be attenuated when interventions are targeted toward the period of memory malleability instigated by memory recall, the reconsolidation window. We describe the physiological mechanisms underlying remote reconsolidation-updating approaches and highlight how they can be enhanced through interventions promoting synaptic plasticity. By capitalizing on an intrinsically relevant phase of memory, reconsolidation-updating harbors the potential to permanently alter remote fear memories.

Making Leaps and Hitting Boundaries in Reconsolidation: Overcoming Boundary Conditions to Increase Clinical Translatability of Reconsolidation-based Therapies

Reconsolidation results in the restabilisation, and thus persistence, of a memory made labile by retrieval, and interfering with this process is thought to enable modification or weakening of the original trace. As such, reconsolidation-blockade has been a focus of research aiming to target the maladaptive memories underlying mental health disorders, including post-traumatic stress disorder and drug addiction. Current first-line therapies are not effective for all patients, and a substantial proportion of those for whom therapies are effective later relapse. A reconsolidation-based intervention would be invaluable as an alternative treatment for these conditions. However, the translation of reconsolidation-based therapies to the clinic presents a number of challenges, with arguably the greatest being the overcoming of the boundary conditions governing the opening of the reconsolidation window. These include factors such as the age and strength of memory, and can broadly be divided into two categories: intrinsic features of the targeted memory itself, and parameters of the reactivation procedure used. With maladaptive memory characteristics inevitably varying amongst individuals, manipulation of the other limitations imposed by procedural variables have been explored to circumvent the boundary conditions on reconsolidation. Although several apparently discrepant results remain to be reconciled and these limitations yet to be truly defined, many studies have produced successful results which encouragingly demonstrate that boundary conditions may be overcome using various proposed strategies to enable translation of a reconsolidation-based intervention to clinical use.

Memory retrieval, reconsolidation, and extinction: Exploring the boundary conditions of post-conditioning cue exposure

Following fear conditioning, behavior can be reduced by giving many CS-alone presentations in a process known as extinction or by presenting a few CS-alone presentations and interfering with subsequent memory reconsolidation. While the two share procedural similarities, both the behavioral outcomes and the neurobiological underpinnings are distinct. Here we review the neural and behavioral mechanisms that produce these separate behavioral reductions, as well as some factors that determine whether or not a retrieval-dependent reconsolidation process or an extinction process will be in effect.

The challenge of memory destabilisation: From prediction error to prior expectations and biomarkers

The re-ignition of memory reconsolidation research sparked by Karim Nader in the early 2000s led to great excitement that 'reconsolidation-based' interventions might be developed for mental health disorders such as post-traumatic stress disorder and substance use disorder. Two decades on, it is clear that reconsolidation-based interventions have been more challenging to translate to the clinic than initially thought. We argue that this challenge could be addressed with a better understanding of how prior expectations interact with information presented in a putative memory reactivation / cue reminder session, and through the identification of non-invasive biomarkers for memory destabilisation that would allow reminder sessions to be 'tuned' to enhance memory lability in an ad hoc manner.

Reconsolidation and Fear Extinction: An Update

Fear memories can be updated behaviorally by delivering extinction trials during the reconsolidation window, which results in a persistent attenuation of fear memories (Monfils et al., Science 324:951-955, 2009). This safe and non-invasive paradigm, termed retrieval-extinction (or post-retrieval extinction), has also been found to be successful at preventing the return of fear in healthy fear conditioned humans (Schiller et al., Nature 463:49-53, 2010), and in the time since its discovery, there has been an explosion of research on the use of retrieval-extinction in fear memories in humans and other animals, some of which have found a long-term reduction in conditioned responding, and some who have not. These discrepant findings have raised concerns as to whether retrieval-extinction really results in updating of the original fear memory, or if it simply enhances extinction. We will first review the progress made on elucidating the cellular mechanisms underlying the fear attenuating effects of retrieval-extinction and how they differ from traditional extinction. Special attention will be paid to the molecular events necessary for retrieval-extinction to successfully occur and how these reconsolidated memories are represented in the brain. Next, we will examine the parameters that determine whether or not a memory will be updated via extinction during the reconsolidation window (also known as boundary conditions). These boundary conditions will also be discussed as possible explanations for discrepant findings of the retrieval-extinction effect. Then we will examine the factors that can determine whether an individual's fears will successfully be attenuated by retrieval-extinction. These individual differences include genetics, age, and psychopathology. Finally, we will discuss recent attempts to bring the retrieval-extinction paradigm from the bench to the bedside for the behavioral treatment of anxiety and trauma disorders.

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.

Obliviate! Reviewing Neural Fundamentals of Intentional Forgetting from a Meta-Analytic Perspective

Intentional forgetting (IF) is an important adaptive mechanism necessary for correct memory functioning, optimal psychological wellbeing, and appropriate daily performance. Due to its complexity, the neuropsychological processes that give birth to successful intentional forgetting are not yet clearly known. In this study, we used two different meta-analytic algorithms, Activation Likelihood Estimation (ALE) & Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) to quantitatively assess the neural correlates of IF and to evaluate the degree of compatibility between the proposed neurobiological models and the existing brain imaging data. We found that IF involves the interaction of two networks, the main “core regions” consisting of a primarily right-lateralized frontal-parietal circuit that is activated irrespective of the paradigm used and sample characteristics and a second less constrained “supportive network” that involves frontal-hippocampal interactions when IF takes place. Additionally, our results support the validity of the inhibitory or thought suppression hypothesis. The presence of a neural signature of IF that is stable regardless of experimental paradigms is a promising finding that may open new venues for the development of effective clinical interventions.

The evidence for and against reactivation-induced memory updating in humans and nonhuman animals

Systematic investigation of reactivation-induced memory updating began in the 1960s, and a wave of research in this area followed the seminal articulation of "reconsolidation" theory in the early 2000s. Myriad studies indicate that memory reactivation can cause previously consolidated memories to become labile and sensitive to weakening, strengthening, or other forms of modification. However, from its nascent period to the present, the field has been beset by inconsistencies in researchers' abilities to replicate seemingly established effects. Here we review these many studies, synthesizing the human and nonhuman animal literature, and suggest that these failures-to-replicate reflect a highly complex and delicately balanced memory modification system, the substrates of which must be finely tuned to enable adaptive memory updating while limiting maladaptive, inaccurate modifications. A systematic approach to the entire body of evidence, integrating positive and null findings, will yield a comprehensive understanding of the complex and dynamic nature of long-term memory storage and the potential for harnessing modification processes to treat mental disorders driven by pervasive maladaptive memories.

Demarcating the boundary conditions of memory reconsolidation: An unsuccessful replication

Disrupting memory reconsolidation provides an opportunity to abruptly reduce the behavioural expression of fear memories with long-lasting effects. The success of a reconsolidation intervention is, however, not guaranteed as it strongly depends on the destabilization of the memory. Identifying the necessary conditions to trigger destabilization remains one of the critical challenges in the field. We aimed to replicate a study from our lab, showing that the occurrence of a prediction error (PE) during reactivation is necessary but not sufficient for destabilization. We tested the effectiveness of a reactivation procedure consisting of a single PE, compared to two control groups receiving no or multiple PEs. All participants received propranolol immediately after reactivation and were tested for fear retention 24 h later. In contrast to the original results, we found no evidence for a reconsolidation effect in the single PE group, but a straightforward interpretation of these results is complicated by the lack of differential fear retention in the control groups. Our results corroborate other failed reconsolidation studies and exemplify the complexity of experimentally investigating this process in humans. Thorough investigation of the interaction between learning and memory reactivation is essential to understand the inconsistencies in the literature and to improve reconsolidation interventions.

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.

Amygdala function in emotion, cognition, and behavior

The amygdala is a core structure in the anterior medial temporal lobe, with an important role in several brain functions involving memory, emotion, perception, social cognition, and even awareness. As a key brain structure for saliency detection, it triggers and controls widespread modulatory signals onto multiple areas of the brain, with a great impact on numerous aspects of adaptive behavior. Here we discuss the neural mechanisms underlying these functions, as established by animal and human research, including insights provided in both healthy and pathological conditions.

Identification of the Similarities and Differences of Molecular Networks Associated With Fear Memory Formation, Extinction, and Updating in the Amygdala

Abnormality of fear memory is one of the important pathogenic factors leading to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), anxiety disorder, and other mental disorders. Clinically, although exposure therapy, which is based on the principle of fear memory extinction, has a certain effect on these diseases, it still relapses frequently in some cases. These troubles can be effectively solved by retrieving the memory in a certain time window before the extinction of fear memory. Therefore, it is generally believed that the extinction of fear memory is the result of forming new safe memory to competitively inhibit the original fear memory, while the retrieval-extinction operation is the updating or erasure of the original fear memory, thus, which has greater clinical therapeutic potential. However, what are the detailed molecular networks, specifically the circular RNAs (circRNAs), involved in fear memory updating, and the differences with fear extinction, are still unknown. In this study, we systematically observed the expression of mRNAs, microRNAs (miRNA), long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs), and circRNAs in the basolateral amygdala of mice after fear memory formation, extinction, and updating by whole-transcriptional sequencing, then a variety of inter-group comparison and bioinformatics analysis were used to find the differential expressed RNAs, enrich the function of them, and construct the molecular interaction networks. Moreover, competing endogenous RNA (ceRNA) molecular networks and transcriptional regulatory networks for the candidate circRNAs were constructed. Through these analyses, we found that about 10% of molecules were both involved in the fear memory extinction and formation, but the molecules and their signaling pathways were almost completely different between fear memory extinction and updating. This study describes a relatively detailed molecular network for fear memory updating, which might provide some novel directions for further mechanism research, and help to develop a specific physical method for fear memory intervention, based on the regulation of these key molecules.

Cathodal transcranial direct current stimulation on the prefrontal cortex applied after reactivation attenuates fear memories and prevent reinstatement after extinction

BACKGROUND

In the last decade, pharmacological strategies targeting reconsolidation after memory retrieval have shown promising efforts to attenuate persistent memories and overcome fear recovery. However, most reconsolidation inhibiting agents have not been approved for human testing. While non-invasive neuromodulation can be considered an alternative approach to pharmacological treatments, there is a lack of evidence about the efficacy of these technologies when modifying memory traces via reactivation/reconsolidation mechanism.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we evaluate the effect of cathodal (c-tDCS) and anodal (a-DCS) transcranial direct current stimulation applied after memory reactivation and extinction in rats.

METHODS

Male Wistar rats were randomly assigned into three groups: one sham group, one anodal tDCS group, and one cathodal tDCS group (500 μA, 20 min). Reconsolidation and extinction of fear memories were evaluated using a contextual fear conditioning.

RESULTS

Our results showed that c-tDCS and a-tDCS after memory reactivation can attenuate mild fear memories. However, only c-tDCS stimulation prevented both fear expression under strong fear learning and fear recovery after a reinstatement protocol without modification of learning rate or extinction retrieval. Nevertheless, the remote memories were resistant to modification through this type of neuromodulation. Our results are discussed considering the interaction between intrinsic excitability promoted by learning and memory retrieval and the electric field applied during tDCS.

CONCLUSION

These results point out some of the boundary conditions influencing the efficacy of tDCS in fear attenuation and open new ways for the development of noninvasive interventions aimed to control fear-related disorders via reconsolidation.

Can contingency rehearsal during the interval between a retrieval cue and extinction training change the effects of post-retrieval extinction?

Return of fear may be prevented by post-retrieval extinction (PRE), a procedure consisting of presenting a stimulus that was present during conditioning (retrieval cue) prior to extinction training. However, recent evidence suggests that there might be circumstances under which PRE is not effective to prevent the return of fear (boundary conditions), but some of these conditions remain unknown. We explored if rehearsing the CS, US or CS-US contingency during the interval between the retrieval cue and extinction training might change the effects of PRE. One day after differential fear conditioning, healthy human participants (n = 83) underwent either standard extinction (control condition, n = 31) or two different PRE procedures, one in which participants rehearsed the CS-US contingency during the interval between the retrieval cue and extinction (rehearsal condition, n = 25), or another in which they underwent a verbal fluency task directing their attention away from the experimental contingencies during this interval (nonrehearsal condition, n = 27). Return of fear in a reinstatement test was observed in both control and rehearsal conditions, whereas in the nonrehearsal condition there was a generalized increase in response to the CS+ and CS-. Differential response in the rehearsal condition had values slightly smaller than the control group with no significant differences from both control and nonrehearsal conditions. These results suggest that the overt behavior of participants during the interval between a retrieval cue and extinction training might change the effects of PRE in healthy human participants, but further manipulations of these variables are needed to confirm these findings.

Lack of Effect of Propranolol on the Reconsolidation of Conditioned Fear Memory due to a Failure to Engage Memory Destabilisation

The prospect of exploiting memory reconsolidation to treat mental health disorders has received great research interest, particularly following demonstrations that the β-adrenergic receptor antagonist propranolol, which is safe for use in humans, can disrupt the reconsolidation of pavlovian conditioned fear memories. However, recent studies have failed to replicate the effects of propranolol on fear memory reconsolidation, and have questioned whether treatments based upon reconsolidation blockade would be robust enough for clinical translation. It remains possible, though, that studies reporting no effect of propranolol on memory reconsolidation could be due to a failure to engage the memory destabilisation process, which is necessary for the memory to become susceptible to disruption with amnestic agents. Demonstrating that memory destabilisation has not been engaged is challenging when only using behavioural measures, but there are molecular correlates of memory destabilisation that can be used to determine whether memory lability has been induced. Here, we attempted to replicate the classic finding that systemic administration of propranolol disrupts the reconsolidation of a pavlovian auditory fear memory. Following a failure to replicate, we manipulated the parameters of the memory reactivation session to enhance prediction error in an attempt to overcome the boundary conditions of reconsolidation. On finding no disruption of memory despite these manipulations, we examined the expression of the post-synaptic density protein Shank in the basolateral amygdala. Degradation of Shank has been shown to correlate with the induction of memory lability, but we found no effect on Shank expression, consistent with the lack of observed behavioural effects.

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.

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.

Failures of memory and the fate of forgotten memories

This review is intended primarily to provide cognitive benchmarks and perhaps a new mindset for behavioral neuroscientists who study memory. Forgetting, defined here broadly as all types of decreases in acquired responding to stimulus-specific eliciting cues, is commonly attributed to one or more of the following families of mechanisms: (1) (4) associative interference by information similar to, but different from the target information, (2) spontaneous decay of memory with increasing retention intervals, (3) displacement from short-term memory by irrelevant information, and (4) inadequate retrieval cues at test. I briefly review each of these families and discuss data suggesting that many apparent instances of spontaneous forgetting and displacement from short-term memory can be viewed as variants of inadequate retrieval cues and associative interference. The potential for recovery of target information from each of these families of forgetting without further relevant training is then reviewed, with a conclusion that most forgetting is due to retrieval failure as opposed to irreversible erasure of memory. The more general point is made that there are logical problems with ever talking about attenuating or erasing a memory as a consequence of conventional forgetting or disrupted consolidation/reconsolidation. Consideration is then given to the frequently overlooked but highly beneficial consequences of most forgetting. Lastly, the major variables that moderate forgetting are summarized, including (a) the similarities of the target information including training context to the explicit retrieval cues and context present at test, (b) the similarities of potentially interfering acquired information to the retrieval cues and context present at test, and (c) the retention interval for the target information relative to that for the potentially interfering information. Appropriate manipulation of these variables can reduce forgetting, and increase forgetting when desired.

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.

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.

Effects of repeated anodal transcranial direct current stimulation on auditory fear extinction in C57BL/6J mice

BACKGROUND

Trauma-based psychotherapy is a first line treatment for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) but not all patients achieve long-term remission. Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) received considerable attention as a neuromodulation method that may improve trauma-based psychotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

We explored the effects of repeated anodal tDCS over the prefrontal cortex (PFC) on fear extinction in mice as a preclinical model for trauma-based psychotherapy.

METHODS

We performed auditory fear conditioning with moderate or high shock intensity on C57BL6/J mice. Next, mice received anodal tDCS (0.2 mA, 20 min) or sham stimulation over the PFC twice daily for five consecutive days. Extinction training was performed by repeatedly exposing mice to the auditory cue the day after the last stimulation session. Early and late retention of extinction were evaluated one day and three weeks after extinction training respectively.

RESULTS

We observed no significant effect of tDCS on the acquisition or retention of fear extinction in mice subjected to fear conditioning with moderate intensity. However, when the intensity of fear conditioning was high, tDCS significantly lowered freezing during the acquisition of extinction, regardless of the extinction protocol. Moreover, when tDCS was combined with a strong extinction protocol, we also observed a significant improvement of early extinction recall. Finally, we found that tDCS reduced generalized fear induced by contextual cues when the intensity of conditioning is high and extinction training limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide a rationale to further explore anodal tDCS over the PFC as potential support for trauma-based psychotherapy for PTSD.

GluN2B and GluN2A-containing NMDAR are differentially involved in extinction memory destabilization and restabilization during reconsolidation

Extinction memory destabilized by recall is restabilized through mTOR-dependent reconsolidation in the hippocampus, but the upstream pathways controlling these processes remain unknown. Hippocampal NMDARs drive local protein synthesis via mTOR signaling and may control active memory maintenance. We found that in adult male Wistar rats, intra dorsal-CA1 administration of the non-subunit selective NMDAR antagonist AP5 or of the GluN2A subunit-containing NMDAR antagonist TCN201 after step down inhibitory avoidance (SDIA) extinction memory recall impaired extinction memory retention and caused SDIA memory recovery. On the contrary, pre-recall administration of AP5 or of the GluN2B subunit-containing NMDAR antagonist RO25-6981 had no effect on extinction memory recall or retention per se but hindered the recovery of the avoidance response induced by post-recall intra-CA1 infusion of the mTOR inhibitor rapamycin. Our results indicate that GluN2B-containing NMDARs are necessary for extinction memory destabilization whereas GluN2A-containing NMDARs are involved in its restabilization, and suggest that pharmacological modulation of the relative activation state of these receptor subtypes around the moment of extinction memory recall may regulate the dominance of extinction memory over the original memory trace.

Enriching CBT by Neuroscience: Novel Avenues to Achieve Personalized Treatments

Although cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) is an established and efficient treatment for a variety of common mental disorders, a considerable number of patients do not respond to treatment or relapse after successful CBT. Recent findings and approaches from neuroscience could pave the way for clinical developments to enhance the outcome of CBT. Herein, we will present how neuroscience can offer novel perspectives to better understand (a) the biological underpinnings of CBT, (b) how we can enrich CBT with neuroscience-informed techniques (augmentation of CBT), and (c) why some patients may respond better to CBT than others (predictors of therapy outcomes), thus paving the way for more personalized and effective treatments. We will introduce some key topics and describe a selection of findings from CBT-related research using tools from neuroscience, with the hope that this will provide clinicians and clinical researchers with a brief and comprehensible overview of the field.

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.

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

In a highly influential report, Schiller et al. (2010) demonstrated long-lasting fear reduction in humans when conducting extinction training shortly following fear memory reactivation. While trying to experimentally replicate the critical conditions of Schiller et al. (2010, Experiment 1), we discovered several irregularities in their paper. Criteria for participant exclusion and the number of excluded participants were misreported; qualitative experimenter decisions actually determined their participant inclusions. Moreover, their statistical analyses were internally inconsistent. After corresponding with the original authors, we received their original data files, allowing us to replicate the reported analyses to verify their results. Here, we report the results of seven separate sets of analyses, three replicating the analyses reported by Schiller et al. (2010) and four applying more principled approaches to participant exclusion, thus including different subsets of the total datasets available, to deduce the influence of specific exclusions and experimenter decisions on the results. For Experiment 1, we were mostly able to replicate the analyses contained in the original report when applying the same qualitative exclusions. However, we found that all of the differences in fear recovery between reactivation-extinction and regular extinction reported by Schiller et al. (2010) were dependent on the qualitative exclusions that they made. With any of the principled approaches to participant exclusion, the degree of fear recovery was highly similar between groups. For Experiment 2, a similar analysis was not possible due to a lack of available data for the excluded participants. Hence, we conducted a verification analysis on the original sample only, which failed to confirm the differences in fear recovery reported by Schiller et al. (2010). Together with the re-analyses, we report a number of additional issues with the way Schiller et al. (2010) processed, analyzed, and reported their data that indicate that their results are unreliable and flawed.