When orienting and anticipation dissociate — a case for scoring electrodermal responses in multiple latency windows in studies of human fear conditioning

The influence of instructions on reversing the generalization of valence, US expectancy, and electrodermal responding in fear conditioning

Pairing a conditional stimulus (CS) with an aversive unconditional stimulus (US) causes negative valence and US expectancy to generalize to stimuli that are perceptually and/or conceptually similar to the CS. Past research has shown that instructing participants that the US is more likely to follow stimuli that are dissimilar to the CS reversed the generalization of US expectancy but left generalized valence unchanged. Here, we examined whether instructions about the relationship between stimuli that are perceptually similar would affect the generalization of valence. A picture of an alien (CS+) was paired with an electric stimulus, while a perceptually different alien stimulus (CS-) was presented alone. After conditioning, valence, US expectancy, and electrodermal responses generalized to different aliens that were perceptually similar (by color and shape) to the CS+ and CS-. Participants were then instructed that aliens perceptually similar to the CS+ belonged to the same group as the CS- and that aliens perceptually similar to the CS- belonged to the same group as the CS+. The instructions caused an elimination (but not a reversal) of generalized expectancy and valence but did not affect generalized electrodermal responses. This suggests that evaluations of generalization stimuli are sensitive to instructions about their relationship to the CS and that dissociations reported in the literature between valence and expectancy after instructions may occur due to the type of instruction used.

The next frontier: Moving human fear conditioning research online

Fear conditioning is a significant area of research that has featured prominently among the topics published in Biological Psychology over the last 50 years. This work has greatly contributed to our understanding of human anxiety and stressor-related disorders. While mainly conducted in the laboratory, recently, there have been initial attempts to conduct fear conditioning experiments online, with around 10 studies published on the subject, primarily in the last two years. These studies have demonstrated the potential of online fear conditioning research, although challenges to ensure that this research meets the same methodological standards as in-person experimentation remain, despite recent progress. We expect that in the coming years new outcome measures will become available online including the measurement of eye-tracking, pupillometry and probe reaction time and that compliance monitoring will be improved. This exciting new approach opens new possibilities for large-scale data collection among hard-to-reach populations and has the potential to transform the future of fear conditioning research.

Fear conditioning depends on the nature of the unconditional stimulus and may be related to hair levels of endocannabinoids

The replicability of fear conditioning research has come under recent scrutiny, with increasing acknowledgment that the use of differing materials and methods may lead to incongruent results. Direct comparisons between the main two unconditional stimuli used in fear conditioning - an electric shock or a loud scream-are scarce, and yet these stimuli are usually used interchangeably. In the present study, we tested whether a scream, a shock, or an unpredictable combination of the two affected fear acquisition, extinction, and return of fear amongst healthy participants (N = 109, 81 female). We also collected hair samples and tested the relationship between fear conditioning and hair endocannabinoid levels. Our findings suggest that, although subjective ratings of pleasantness, arousal, and anxiety were similar regardless of the unconditional stimuli used, skin conductance responses were significantly lower for stimuli paired with the scream compared to a shock alone. Further, reducing the predictability of the unconditional stimulus reduced habituation of skin conductance responses during acquisition and reacquisition, but did not produce stronger conditioning compared to shock alone. Exploratory analyses suggested that hair endocannabinoids were associated with overall physiological arousal during fear conditioning, as well as higher return of fear to the threat cue, but not to the safety cue. These findings have multiple implications for the design and replicability of fear conditioning research and provide the first evidence for an association between hair levels of endocannabinoids and human fear conditioning.

Approximating exposure therapy in the lab: Replacing the CS+ with a similar versus a different stimulus and including additional stimuli resembling the CS+ during extinction

Recent studies have shown that extinction training including the conditional stimulus (CS+) and stimuli that are similar to the CS + enhances extinction retention and generalisation to novel stimuli. However, in a clinical setting, the CS+ is rarely available for use during exposure therapy. The aim of the present study was to determine if replacing the CS+ with a similar versus different stimulus, and including other similar stimuli during extinction, could reduce fear at test on par with extinction using the original CS+ with and without other similar stimuli. In an experiment conducted in a single session, participants completed a habituation phase followed by an acquisition phase using two dog images presented with (CS+) and without (CS-) an acoustic unconditional stimulus (US). Participants were randomly allocated to four extinction conditions: similar CS + dog with novel dog images (Similar replacement extinction condition); different CS + dog with novel dog images (Different replacement extinction condition); original CS + dog with novel dog images (Multiple extinction control condition); and original CS + without novel dog images (Standard extinction control condition). All participants completed a test phase with the original CSs followed by a generalisation test with another two novel dog images. All groups acquired, and then extinguished differential skin conductance responses (SCRs) with no differences observed between groups. Whereas the Similar replacement extinction group and the Multiple and Standard extinction control groups did not exhibit significant differential SCRs when re-exposed to the original CS + relative to the CS- at test, differential responding to the CSs was significant at test in the Different replacement extinction group. There were no significant differences between groups in SCRs to the two novel dog images during the generalisation phase and in between-phase subjective ratings. Findings suggest that replacement stimuli used during extinction should be as similar as possible to the CS + to reduce physiological arousal to the original CS+.

Hair endocannabinoids predict physiological fear conditioning and salivary endocannabinoids predict subjective stress reactivity in humans

On the basis of substantial preclinical evidence, the endogenous cannabinoid system has been proposed to be closely involved in stress reactivity and extinction of fear. Existing human research supports this proposal to some extent, but existing studies have used only a narrow range of tools and biomatrices to measure endocannabinoids during stress and fear experiments. In the present study we collected hair and saliva samples from 99 healthy participants who completed a fear conditioning and intrusive memory task. Subjective, physiological and biological stress reactivity to a trauma film, which later served as unconditional stimulus during fear conditioning, was also measured. We found that salivary endocannabinoid concentrations predicted subjective responses to stress, but not cortisol stress reactivity, and replicated previous findings demonstrating a sex dimorphism in hair and salivary endocannabinoid levels. Hair 2-arachidonoyl glycerol levels were significantly associated with better retention of safety learning during extinction and renewal phases of fear conditioning, while hair concentrations of oleoylethanolamide and palmitoylethanolamide were associated with overall physiological arousal, but not conditional learning, during fear conditioning. This study is the first to test the relationship between hair and salivary endocannabinoids and these important psychological processes. Our results suggest that these measures may serve as biomarkers of dysregulation in human fear memory and stress.

The influence of cross unconditional stimulus reinstatement on electrodermal responding and conditional stimulus valence in differential fear conditioning

We examined whether the inhibitory Conditional Stimulus (CS)-no Unconditional Stimulus (US) association formed during extinction can be triggered by a novel US during the reinstatement of conditional electrodermal responding and self-reported CS valence in human differential fear conditioning. Participants were trained with either a shock or an aversive scream US before undergoing extinction. Participants then received either the same (i.e., shock_shock or scream_scream) or a different US during reinstatement (i.e., shock_scream, scream_shock). Differential conditioning across all indices was stronger when a shock US was used during acquisition. After reinstatement, electrodermal responding to both the CS+ and the CS- increased regardless of the type of US used during reinstatement (non-differential reinstatement). Differential CS valence evaluations were larger after reinstatement in the groups that received the same US during acquisition and reinstatement (differential reinstatement), but differential evaluations did not increase in the groups receiving a different US at reinstatement. This dissociation suggests that the reinstatement of negative stimulus valence and the reinstatement of expectancy learning may differ.

Pupil dilation tracks divergent learning processes in aware versus unaware Pavlovian conditioning

Evidence regarding unaware differential fear conditioning in humans is mixed and even less is known about the effects of contingency awareness on appetitive conditioning. Phasic pupil dilation responses (PDR) might be more sensitive for capturing implicit learning than other measures, such as skin conductance responses (SCR). Here, we report data from two delay conditioning experiments utilizing PDR (alongside SCR and subjective assessments) to investigate the role of contingency awareness in aversive and appetitive conditioning. In both experiments, valence of unconditioned stimuli (UCS) was varied within participants by administering aversive (mild electric shocks) and appetitive UCSs (monetary rewards). Preceding visual stimuli (CSs) predicted either the reward, the shock (65% reinforcement), or neither UCS. In Exp. 1, participants were fully instructed about CS-UCS contingencies, whereas in Exp. 2, no such information was given. PDR and SCR demonstrated successful differential conditioning in Exp. 1 and in (learned) aware participants in Exp. 2. In non-instructed participants who remained fully unaware of contingencies (Exp. 2), differential modulation of early PDR (immediately after CS onset) by appetitive cues emerged. Associations with model-derived learning parameters further suggest that early PDR in unaware participants mainly reflect implicit learning of expected outcome value, whereas early PDR in aware (instructed/learned-aware) participants presumably index attentional processes (related to uncertainty/prediction error processing). Similar, but less clear results emerged for later PDR (preceding UCS onset). Our data argue in favor of a dual-process account of associative learning, suggesting that value-related processing can take place irrespective of mechanisms involved in conscious memory formation.

Fear memory in humans is consolidated over time independently of sleep

Fear memories can be altered after acquisition by processes, such as fear memory consolidation or fear extinction, even without further exposure to the fear-eliciting stimuli, but factors contributing to these processes are not well understood. Sleep is known to consolidate, strengthen, and change newly acquired declarative and procedural memories. However, evidence on the role of time and sleep in the consolidation of fear memories is inconclusive. We used highly sensitive electrophysiological measures to examine the development of fear-conditioned responses over time and sleep in humans. We assessed event-related brain potentials (ERP) in 18 healthy, young individuals during fear conditioning before and after a 2-hour afternoon nap or a corresponding wake interval in a counterbalanced within-subject design. The procedure involved pairing a neutral tone (CS+) with a highly unpleasant sound. As a control, another neutral tone (CS-) was paired with a neutral sound. Fear responses were examined before the interval during a habituation phase and an acquisition phase as well as after the interval during an extinction phase and a reacquisition phase. Differential fear conditioning during acquisition was evidenced by a more negative slow ERP component (stimulus-preceding negativity) developing before the unconditioned stimulus (loud noise). This differential fear response was even stronger after the interval during reacquisition compared with initial acquisition, but this effect was similarly pronounced after sleep and wakefulness. These findings suggest that fear memories are consolidated over time, with this effect being independent of intervening sleep.

Intolerance of uncertainty affects electrodermal responses during fear acquisition: Evidence from electrodermal responses to unconditional stimulus omission

Past research has shown that Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) affects Pavlovian fear conditioning processes. In particular, extinction of learned fear is delayed in those reporting high IU. Reports of differences during acquisition are less consistent with most of the studies reporting no evidence for effects of IU. This may be due to past studies' focus on first interval electrodermal responses or fear potentiated startle, rather than on indices that may better capture uncertainty - like the response to the absence of a probabilistic unconditional stimulus. The current analysis combined data across three experiments that employed a 50 % reinforcement schedule and assessed electrodermal responses and (in two experiments) ratings of conditional stimulus pleasantness. Participants scoring high on IU showed overall larger electrodermal first interval responses during habituation and acquisition but did not differ from those scoring low on IU in differential conditioning (the difference between CS+ and CS-), as indicated by electrodermal first or second interval responses or ratings of CS pleasantness. However, participants high in IU showed larger differential third interval electrodermal responses to the omission of the electro-tactile unconditional stimulus during acquisition. Some evidence for this difference emerged in each experiment, supporting the reliability of the result. The current results suggest that effects of IU emerge in conditions of high uncertainty in Pavlovian fear learning tasks, such as during the omission of probabilistic unconditional stimuli.

Conceptual generalisation in fear conditioning using single and multiple category exemplars as conditional stimuli - electrodermal responses and valence evaluations generalise to the broader category

Conceptual generalisation occurs when conditional responses generalise to novel stimuli from the same category. Past research demonstrates that physiological fear responses generalise across categories, however, conceptual generalisation of stimulus valence evaluations during fear conditioning has not been examined. We investigated whether conceptual generalisation, as indexed by electrodermal responses and stimulus evaluations, would occur, and differ after training with single or multiple conditional stimuli (CSs). Stimuli from two of four categories (vegetables, farm animals, clothing, and office supplies) were used as the CS+ (followed by an electric stimulus) or CS- (presented alone). Generalisation was assessed by presenting novel stimuli from the CS categories after acquisition, extinction, and reinstatement. One category exemplar was used as the CS+ and CS- in the single group, whereas three exemplars were used as the CS+ and CS- in the multiple group. Electrodermal responses generalised in acquisition and extinction but did not differ between groups. In the multiple group, CS evaluations generalised in acquisition and extinction, whereas generalisation was not evident in the single group. Training with multiple CSs also resulted in the extinction of stimulus valence. The current findings have implications for future research examining the generalisation of valence and for exposure-based treatments of anxiety.

The absence of differential electrodermal responding in the second half of acquisition does not indicate the absence of fear learning

Many contemporary studies of human fear conditioning exclude participants who fail to show differential electrodermal responding during late stages of acquisition training, deeming them to be non-Learners. The current study examined whether non-Learners, defined as those who fail to show larger electrodermal first interval responses to CS+ than to CS- in the second half of acquisition, show differential electrodermal responding early during acquisition or during extinction or evidence of fear-learning on other measures, including rated CS valence and contingency report. In a sample of 351 participants who completed a standard differential fear-conditioning paradigm that employed electrodermal first and second interval responses (FIR, SIR), continuous CS evaluations, and post-experimental contingency reports to assess fear-learning, 74 participants were identified as non-Learners. These non-Learners displayed overall smaller electrodermal responses but showed evidence for differential conditioning during acquisition in electrodermal FIR (block1) and SIR (blocks 2-3) and in CS evaluations during acquisition (blocks 2-4) and extinction (blocks 1-4). Fifty-nine non-Learners correctly reported the contingencies. A lack of differential electrodermal first interval responding during the second half of acquisition does not indicate the absence of fear-learning. Rather, this criterion appears to capture participants who exhibit low physiological arousal and performance decrements toward the end of acquisition. Applying criteria based on "end of acquisition" electrodermal responding to determine "non-learning" results in the exclusion of participants who display fear-learning at other experimental stages or in other measures.

The effects of presenting additional stimuli resembling the CS+ during extinction on extinction retention and generalisation to novel stimuli

Recent studies have shown that extinction training including the conditional stimulus (CS+) and stimuli similar to the CS + enhances extinction retention and generalisation to novel stimuli. The aim of the present study was to confirm that these effects are specific to presenting stimuli similar to the CS+ during extinction and not merely an effect of additional trials or additional stimuli unrelated to the CS+. In an experiment conducted in a single session on the same day, participants (134 adults; 70.7% female; 17-40 years of age, M = 20.04, SD = 4.36) completed a habituation phase followed by an acquisition phase using dog images presented with (CS+) and without (CS-) a dog growl paired with a scream unconditional stimulus (US). Participants were randomly allocated to four extinction conditions: Multiple exemplar extinction comprising the CSs and two novel dog images similar to the CS+; Standard extinction control matched for the number of CS+ and CS- presentations; Extended extinction control matched for the total number extinction trials, and Other stimuli extinction control comprising the CSs and two novel stimuli unrelated to the CS+. All participants completed an extinction test with the original CSs followed by a generalisation test with two novel dog images. Multiple, Standard and Other stimuli extinction groups exhibited larger skin conductance responses (SCRs) during extinction to the CSs compared to the Extended extinction group. SCRs to the additional dog images in the Multiple group were larger than SCRs to the additional CSs in the Extended group and the novel images in the Other stimuli group. There were no group differences in responses to the CSs during extinction test. Unlike the other groups, SCRs to the first presentation of the novel generalisation dogs did not differ from those to the last CS trials in extinction in the Multiple group. However, this group difference did not persist beyond the initial generalisation trial. Finally, the Multiple, Extended, and Other stimuli groups exhibited more negative CS evaluations after extinction, extinction test, and generalisation test than the Standard extinction group. The results suggest that extinction with the original CSs and additional stimuli resembling the CS + elevated physiological responses during extinction and reduced physiological responses to novel stimuli similar to the CSs. Further studies are needed including clinical samples and trial-by-trial evaluations of the stimuli presented.

Complete the triangulation: Quantifying differential fear conditioning with a noninterfering and sensitive behavioral measure along with self-report and physiological measures

According to the multicomponent view, emotion is expressed through subjective feelings and thoughts, physiological activation, and behavioral responses. In human fear conditioning research, the former two are much more popular than the third category. One concern is that concurrent behavioral probes may interfere with the conditioning process. To allow triangulation of emotion research through simultaneous employment of subjective, physiological, and behavioral measurement, it is necessary to find behavioral measures that meet the criteria of causing no interference while being sensitive to conditioning. In this study, a basic visual attention task was examined in terms of its impact on differential fear conditioning as measured by both subjective (i.e., self-reported fear and shock estimation) and physiological (i.e., skin conductance response/SCR) expression; and its ability to detect fear conditioning indicated by a reaction time (RT) or accuracy difference between the two conditioned stimuli (CS+ vs. CS-). While participants in the probe group (n = 86) completed differential fear conditioning with the behavioral task, those in the no-probe group (n = 76) underwent conditioning by itself. Based on self-reported fear, shock estimation, and SCR, both groups successfully acquired differential fear with no apparent between-group difference in the degree of conditioning. In the probe group, RT but not accuracy exhibited a difference between CS+ and CS-. These findings suggest that the selected visual attention task does not interfere with differential fear conditioning measured via SCR and self-report and is a sensitive measure of differential conditioning. Exploratory individual analyses also revealed significant relationships between the above measures.

Does the assessment of different combinations of within-phase subjective measures influence electrodermal responding and between-phase subjective ratings during fear conditioning and extinction experiments?

The type and number of dependent measures assessed have varied between fear conditioning and extinction experiments and it remains unclear whether methodological differences influence results. Measuring skin conductance responses (SCRs) and between-phase subjective ratings between four conditions; Con condition had no within-phase ratings; US Exp condition included within-phase US expectancy ratings only; CS Eval condition included within-phase CS evaluations only and All Meas condition included both. All Meas condition exhibited larger SCRs compared to other conditions during acquisition, extinction, and return of differential responding at test. Differential SCRs did not extinguish in CS Eval and Con conditions, and CS Eval condition exhibited smaller CS- SCRs than other conditions throughout phases. US Exp condition revealed differential conditioning, successful extinction, and no return of differential SCRs. Between-phase ratings were not affected by within-phase ratings. Researchers should consider assessing different combinations of within-phase subjective ratings depending on the aims of their research.

"Prepared" fear or socio-cultural learning? Fear conditioned to guns, snakes, and spiders is eliminated by instructed extinction in a within-participant differential fear conditioning paradigm

Across three experiments, we investigated whether electrodermal responses conditioned to ontogenetic fear-relevant (pointed guns) and phylogenetic fear-relevant stimuli (snakes and spiders) would resist instructed extinction in a within-participant differential fear conditioning paradigm. Instructed extinction involves informing participants before extinction that the unconditional stimulus (US) will no longer be presented. This manipulation has been shown to abolish fear conditioned to fear-irrelevant conditional stimuli, but is said to leave fear conditioned to images of snakes and spiders intact. The latter finding, however, has only been demonstrated when fear-relevance is manipulated between-groups. It is also not known whether instructed extinction affects fear conditioned to ontogenetic fear-relevant stimuli, such as pointed guns. In Experiment 1, we demonstrated that fear conditioned to images of pointed guns does not resist instructed extinction. In Experiment 2, we detected some evidence to suggest that fear conditioned to images of snakes and spiders survives instructed extinction but this evidence was not conclusive. In Experiment 3, we directly compared the effects of instructed extinction on fear conditioned to snakes and spiders and to guns and provide strong evidence that fear conditioned to both classes of stimuli is reduced after instructed extinction with no differences between ontogenetic and phylogenetic stimuli. The current results suggest that when fear relevance is manipulated within-participants fear conditioned to both phylogenetic and ontogenetic, fear-relevant stimuli responds to instructed extinction providing evidence in favor of a socio-cultural explanation for "preparedness" effects.

Evaluative conditioning affects the subsequent acquisition of differential fear conditioning as indexed by electrodermal responding and stimulus evaluations

It is currently unclear whether the acquisition of negative stimulus valence in evaluative and fear conditioning paradigms is interrelated or independent. The present study used a transfer paradigm to address this question. Three groups of participants were trained in a picture-picture evaluative conditioning paradigm before completing acquisition of differential fear conditioning using graphical shapes as conditional stimuli (CSs). In group congruent, the shape used as CS+ (paired with the US during fear conditioning) was paired with negative pictures, whereas the shape used as CS- (presented alone during fear conditioning) was paired with positive pictures. In group incongruent, the shape used as CS+ was paired with positive pictures, whereas the shape used as CS- was paired with negative pictures. In group different, different shapes were employed in evaluative and fear conditioning. Acquisition of differential electrodermal responses emerged within fewer acquisition trials in groups congruent and different than in group incongruent. Transfer of evaluative learning across paradigms was evident only after removal of participants who failed to display evaluative conditioning. The current research indicates that stimulus valence acquired during evaluative conditioning transfers to fear conditioning and will differentially affect the acquisition of fear learning as indexed by subjective evaluations and electrodermal responses. The findings suggest that evaluative and fear conditioning are not independent.

The need for standards in the design of differential fear conditioning and extinction experiments in youth: A systematic review and recommendations for research on anxiety

Fear extinction studies in youth have yielded mixed results due to developmental processes and variations in design, methodology and dependent measures. This systematic review focused on studies with healthy youth between 2 and 17 years of age to identify experimental parameters of studies documenting extinction effects. Thirty-five studies met inclusion criteria and the following themes emerged (a) some studies employed parameters and task demands that are complex and require active participant involvement whereas others involved simple stimulus configurations and passive participant involvement, and (b) variation exists among dependent measures in units of measurement, timing and type of measurement. The review identified that studies using geometric shape conditioned stimuli (CS) paired with a tone unconditioned stimulus (US) (e.g., metal scraping on slate), as well as face CSs with a scream US produced the most reliable extinction effects, although the latter combination may be associated with higher drop-out than shape CSs and a tone US. The most commonly used and effective dependent measures for revealing extinction effects were skin conductance responses (SCR) and subjective ratings (SR) of CS valence, fearfulness and arousal. Fear potentiated startle (FPS) blink reflexes were also an effective but less commonly used measure. It is recommended that future studies use shape CSs and the metal scraping on slate US in studies involving children and either shape CSs and the metal scraping on slate US or face CSs paired with a scream US with adolescents. It is also recommended that US expectancy ratings and CS evaluations are assessed trial-by-trial and between-phase, and that startle-eliciting stimuli to measure startle blink reflexes are delivered on every second trial per CS so that SCR and FPS can be examined. However, further research is required to determine whether increased participant involvement due to providing trial-by-trial and between-phase ratings of the CSs and US differentially influences responding, particularly in children relative to adolescents and adults.

Temporal context cues in human fear conditioning: Unreinforced conditional stimuli can segment learning into distinct temporal contexts and drive fear responding

In associative learning, if stimulus A is presented in the same temporal context as the conditional stimulus (CS) - outcome association (but not in a way that allows an A-CS association to form) it becomes a temporal context cue, acquiring the ability to activate this context and retrieve the CS-outcome association. We examined whether a CS- presented during acquisition or extinction that predicted the absence of the unconditional stimulus (US) could act as a temporal context cue, reducing or enhancing responding, in differential fear conditioning. Two groups received acquisition (CSx-US, CSa-noUS) in phase 1 and extinction (CSx-noUS; CSe-noUS) in phase 2 (AE groups), and two groups received extinction in phase 1 and acquisition in phase 2 (EA groups). After a delay, participants were presented with either CSa (AEa and EAa groups) or CSe (AEe and EAe groups). Responding to CSx was enhanced after presentation of CSa but reduced after presentation of CSe, suggesting that training was segmented into two learning episodes and that the unreinforced CS present during an episode retrieved the CSx-US or CSx-noUS association. These findings suggest that temporal context cues may enhance or reduce fear responding, providing an exciting new avenue for relapse prevention research.