状态焦虑对条件恐惧习得和消退的影响

采用44名正常女性大学生作为被试, 通过心理社会压力暴露的方法诱发焦虑组被试的状态焦虑, 采用主观预期值作为指标, 考察焦虑对条件恐惧习得和消退的直接影响, 并探讨这种影响是否也表现在评价性条件作用上。结果表明：心理社会压力暴露显著提高了焦虑组被试的状态焦虑。在习得阶段, 状态焦虑降低了被试对条件刺激的辨别条件恐惧反应, 具体而言, 状态焦虑降低了被试对CS+的主观预期值, 但是却提高了对CS?的主观预期值; 在消退阶段, 状态焦虑抑制了被试对条件刺激的消退。状态焦虑的影响也表现在评价性条件作用上, 和控制组相比, 焦虑组在习惯化和消退阶段对条件刺激表现出了更为负性的效价评定。     

提取-消退范式中复合刺激对恐惧消退的影响

情绪障碍治疗的关键在于消退条件性恐惧记忆,研究证明基于记忆再巩固的提取-消退范式能有效消除或改写原有的恐惧记忆。本研究将提取-消退范式应用到更复杂的恐惧记忆中,采用多感官复合刺激(声音+图片)作为条件刺激,以皮电反应作为恐惧反应指标,考察采用单个线索(声音或图片)、复合线索(声音+图片)进行提取-消退对条件性恐惧记忆的消退效果有何差异。结果表明:声音线索提取-消退组出现了自发恢复和重建效应,图片提取-消退组只出现了重建效应,复合刺激提取-消退组未出现自发恢复和重建效应。说明由复合刺激线索引发的条件性恐惧,采用复合刺激中的单个较强线索或原有完整线索进行提取-消退,对恐惧记忆的消退效果最好。     

预期错误在复合恐惧记忆提取消退中的作用

基于记忆再巩固理论的提取消退范式被证明是一种有效和颇有前景的消除不良记忆的方法。本研究将预期错误(Prediction Error, PE)应用于提取消退范式中, 采用多感官复合刺激模型(声音 + 图片)作为条件刺激, 以皮电反应作为恐惧反应指标, 考察在提取阶段不同的预期错误设置(无PE、单个负性PE、单个正性PE和多重PE)对条件性恐惧记忆提取消退效果有何差异。结果表明：无PE组和多重PE组出现了恐惧的自发恢复和重建效应, 而负性PE组和正性PE组均没有出现恐惧的自发恢复和重建效应。说明了在对复合恐惧记忆进行提取消退时, 提取阶段适当的PE才能使记忆进入再巩固过程, 随后传统消退达到抑制恐惧返回效果, 提取阶段没有PE或PE量过多都不能达到恐惧消退效果。     

状态焦虑对条件性恐惧泛化的影响

恐惧的过度泛化是焦虑障碍患者重要的潜在病因,探索焦虑对恐惧泛化的影响具有重要意义。本研究在恐惧习得后,通过恐惧创伤电影范式诱发状态焦虑组被试的焦虑水平,采用主观预期值和皮电反应值作为指标,考察状态焦虑对条件性恐惧泛化的影响。结果表明,恐惧创伤电影范式显著提高了状态焦虑组被试的焦虑水平。在泛化阶段,状态焦虑组被试表现出更强的恐惧泛化,对与条件刺激相似的泛化刺激表现出更强烈的恐惧以及更高的预期。状态焦虑使得被试恐惧泛化的消退更慢,持续时间更长。研究同时发现,在状态焦虑下,被试对条件刺激的辨识出现增强趋势。研究结果提示在对经历负性事件个体进行临床干预时,可通过降低其焦虑水平来减少过度泛化。     

条件性恐惧提取消退的性别差异

基于记忆再巩固理论的提取消退范式能够有效地削弱非适应性恐惧记忆。性别差异是个体差异性研究的关键变量, 但在提取消退范式的研究中仍然比较少见关于性别差异的探索。因此本研究以立体几何图形作为条件刺激, 腕部电击作为非条件刺激, 皮肤电反应为恐惧反应指标, 探究提取消退范式在恐惧消退效果上是否存在性别差异。结果表明, 在恐惧自发恢复测试中, 提取消退范式的所有被试都成功抑制了恐惧复发, 但恐惧重建测试中只有女性被试抑制了恐惧复发。这说明, 提取消退范式在抑制恐惧自发恢复方面效果显著, 在恐惧重建上女性的消退效果显著优于男性。     

条件性恐惧泛化的性别差异

恐惧的过度泛化是焦虑障碍的核心症状之一, 表现为患者对与原危险刺激极不相似的中性刺激也有着较高强度的恐惧反应。临床上, 女性比男性更有可能患焦虑障碍, 因而对恐惧泛化进行性别差异研究可以为解释女性有着更高焦虑障碍发病率提供新的角度, 同时为临床治疗提供参考。本研究采用辨别性条件恐惧范式, 以主观预期值和皮电反应值作为测量指标, 从行为和生理两个层面对条件性恐惧泛化程度和恐惧泛化消退的性别差异进行研究。结果发现, 在恐惧泛化程度上, 未出现显著性别差异。在恐惧泛化消退上, 在主观预期值和皮电反应值两个层面均有着显著性别差异, 具体表现为相较于男性, 女性恐惧泛化的消退更慢, 持续时间更长。研究结果表明, 女性焦虑障碍高发病率的潜在影响因素之一可能在于女性对于恐惧泛化刺激的难以消除。     

积极情绪对条件性恐惧泛化的抑制作用

恐惧的过度泛化是焦虑障碍的核心症状之一,表现为患者对与原危险刺激极不相似的安全刺激也产生恐惧反应。本研究采用经典条件恐惧范式,以US主观预期、回溯性恐惧评定、回溯性效价评定和皮电反应作为恐惧反应的指标,通过"最好自我"训练来诱发被试的积极情绪,考察了恐惧习得后的积极情绪对于恐惧泛化的影响。本研究发现,积极情绪能有效地抑制条件性恐惧的泛化,增强被试对安全信号的学习,并对消退后的恐惧重建现象起到预防作用。研究同时显示,恐惧泛化在主观评定指标和生理指标间出现了分离,这表明积极情绪对恐惧泛化的抑制作用是一个综合的过程,可能涉及到不同的作用机制。本研究结果提示可以通过诱发积极情绪,抑制条件性恐惧的泛化,对临床干预有一定的启发意义。     

认知重评对负性效价的抑制促进条件性恐惧消退

认知重评能有效降低个体对情感刺激的负性情绪体验, 但指导性认知重评在恐惧记忆治疗中效果存在争议。本文将认知重评范式与辨别式条件恐惧反应范式结合, 以效价和US预期值为指标, 探讨指导性认知重评训练对恐惧情绪习得和消退的影响效果。以低认知重评能力个体为被试, 在实验前24 h进行指导性认知重评训练。条件性恐惧任务为期2天, 第一天完成条件性恐惧的习得和消退任务, 第二天完成条件性恐惧的再消退任务。结果显示, 经过重评训练后个体在条件性恐惧任务中的恐惧情绪效价显著较低, 说明认知重评有效降低低认知重评能力个体在急性应激状态下的负性情绪体验。所有被试均成功完成辨别式条件性恐惧的习得和消退任务, 因此重评训练并不削弱个体对危险或者安全信息的辨别能力。但在条件性恐惧的消退过程中, 认知重评指导训练加快了恐惧消退, 且24 h后测得的条件性恐惧程度显著较低, 说明指导性重评提高了条件性恐惧记忆的消退效率, 并减弱了条件性恐惧的消退返回。     

情景变换诱发已消退恐惧记忆重现的神经环路

暴露疗法是治疗创伤后应激障碍的主要行为疗法。当被试反复暴露于可引起恐惧反应的条件刺激(如白噪音), 但却不伴有非条件刺激(如足底电击)时, 恐惧记忆将被消退, 形成消退记忆。但恐惧记忆并未从根本上被擦除, 当被试在消退训练以外的情景暴露于条件刺激时, 已消退的恐惧记忆将会重现。海马、内侧前额叶皮层、杏仁核等脑区及其相互连接的神经环路是情景诱发恐惧记忆重现的生理基础。情景变化诱发恐惧记忆重现过程中, 海马可能是通过直接投射至杏仁核基底核、杏仁核外侧核或通过边缘前皮质间接调控杏仁核基底核、杏仁核外侧核的功能, 产生恐惧反应。     

阻碍条件性恐惧记忆消退的原因分析

创伤后应激障碍是个体经历严重应激后形成的一种焦虑障碍,对其治疗的关键是消退由创伤应激导致的条件性恐惧记忆,但目前最有效的暴露疗法并不能真正有效地抑制患者恐惧记忆的表达.对条件性恐惧的动物模型研究发现情绪性增强效应、恐惧记忆二级条件化与再巩固、内侧前额叶皮层功能不足等均能够阻碍条件性恐惧记忆的消退.针对这几个方面可以探索治疗创伤后应激障碍的相应方法.     

When two paradigms meet: Does evaluative learning extinguish in differential fear conditioning?

Contemporary theories of Pavlovian conditioning propose a distinction between signal learning (SL), in which a conditioned stimulus (CS) becomes a predictor for a biologically significant unconditioned stimulus (US), and evaluative learning (EL), in which the valence of the US is transferred to the CS. This distinction is based largely on the different susceptibilities of EL and SL to extinction. This study compared the extinction of indices of EL (online valence ratings) and SL (US-expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses, SCRs) in a differential fear conditioning design using complex CSs. Only half of the participants gave online valence ratings, allowing us to confirm that online valence measurement did not influence SCRs. In line with the distinction between EL and SL, SCRs extinguished rapidly while valence ratings showed resistance to extinction. US-expectancy ratings, however, were not distinguishable from valence ratings indicating that verbal indicators of EL and SL share a similar time course.     

Fear conditioning in posttraumatic stress disorder: evidence for delayed extinction of autonomic, experiential, and behavioural responses

Aversive conditioning has been proposed as an important factor involved in the etiology of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). However, it is not yet fully understood exactly which learning mechanisms are characteristic for PTSD. PTSD patients (n=36), and healthy individuals with and without trauma exposure (TE group, n=21; nTE group, n=34), underwent a differential fear conditioning experiment consisting of habituation, acquisition, and extinction phases. An electrical stimulus served as the unconditioned stimulus (US), and two neutral pictures as conditioned stimuli (CS+, paired; CS-, unpaired). Conditioned responses were quantified by skin conductance responses (SCRs), subjective ratings of CS valence and US-expectancy, and a behavioural test. In contrast to the nTE group, PTSD patients showed delayed extinction of SCRs to the CS+. Online ratings of valence and US-expectancy as well as the behavioural test confirmed this pattern. These findings point to a deficit in extinction learning and highlight the role of affective valence appraisals and cognitive biases in PTSD. In addition, there was some evidence that a subgroup of PTSD patients had difficulties in learning the CS-US contingency, thereby providing preliminary evidence of reduced discrimination learning.     

Return of fear in a human differential conditioning paradigm caused by a stimulus change after extinction

In a human fear conditioning experiment, 32 participants were trained in a differential conditioning procedure with geometrical shapes as CS+ and CS- (four presentations each), and an electric shock as US. Measures of conditioned responding were skin conductance response (SCR) and retrospective US-expectancy ratings. For half of the participants (Generalization Group, GG), the subsequent extinction phase consisted of four nonreinforced presentations of generalization stimuli (GS+ and GS-). Participants from the Extinction control Group received an equal amount of nonreinforced presentations of the CSs. Finally, all participants were tested with the original CSs. The results from both measures clearly show an increase in the size of the discrimination upon the stimulus change after extinction in the GG. Because this pattern is not observed in the Extinction control Group, extinction performance appears to be somehow restricted to the perceptual characteristics of the extinction stimulus. Interestingly, the size of the conditioned SCR discrimination in the GG is not influenced by the stimulus change after acquisition. This observation points to a differential impact of stimulus change after acquisition vs. extinction treatment. The findings are discussed from the theoretical perspective of renewal and the clinical perspective of Return of Fear.     

Return of experimentally induced chocolate craving after extinction in a different context: divergence between craving for and expecting to eat chocolate

Unlike in fear conditioning, little attention has been devoted to extinction and renewal in appetitive conditioning, despite its relevance for extinction-based addiction treatments. We developed a paradigm, using a specific tray as a conditioned stimulus (CS) for eating chocolate (unconditioned stimulus, US), to investigate the effects of context change on acquisition and extinction of conditioned chocolate craving using an ABA renewal design. In Study 1 (n=32), participants successfully acquired chocolate craving, but unlike what is commonly observed in fear conditioning, craving did not extinguish. In Study 2, we separately assessed craving and US expectancy in a between-subjects design (n=64). US-expectancy data showed acquisition, extinction and renewal in the ABA group. The craving data did not follow this pattern, suggesting different mechanisms for craving and US expectancy. Similarities and differences between craving and US expectancy, as well as practical implications, are discussed.     

The development of cued versus contextual conditioning in a predictable and an unpredictable human fear conditioning preparation

In this human fear conditioning study, the online development of conditioned US-expectancy to discrete cues and background contexts was measured in two groups. In the paired group (n=30), the CS was systematically followed by an aversive shock (US). In the unpaired group (n=30), CS and US were presented explicitly unpaired. Using US-expectancy ratings, we replicated the basic finding already illustrated in humans with startle modulation. In the paired group, the CS elicited more US-expectancy than the context, whereas in the unpaired group, the context elicited more US-expectancy than the CS. Interestingly, we also observed a trial-by-trial development of conditioning to the context in the unpaired group as indicated by a significant linear trend. This gradual development and the evidence for the role of US-expectancy in contextual fear add to the idea that cued and contextual fear rely on the same basic associative processes.     

Non-differential return of fear in humans after a reinstatement procedure

The present experiment investigated reinstatement of fear in humans using a differential fear conditioning preparation. In this experiment, one neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus; CS+) was paired with an aversive stimulus (unconditioned stimulus; US) during the acquisition phase, while another neutral stimulus was not (CS−). This procedure led to a difference in responding between the CS+ and the CS− (i.e., differential conditioning). After this acquisition phase, an extinction phase followed, during which both CSs were presented without the US, resulting in a decrease in differential conditioned responding. Reinstatement refers to the return of extinguished conditioned responses due to the experience of US-only trials after the extinction phase. This phenomenon was investigated by presenting half of the participants (reinstatement group) with unpredictable USs after the extinction phase. The control group did not receive these USs after the extinction procedure. The results show that return of fear was clearly apparent after the reinstating USs. This return of fear was, however, not limited to the CS+. An increase in ‘conditioned’ responding was also observed for the control stimulus. This interesting observation will be discussed against the background of a number of recent theoretical conceptualizations of reinstatement.     

Pavlovian Disgust Conditioning and Generalization: Specificity and Associations With Individual Differences

Although studies have identified differences between fear and disgust conditioning, much less is known about the generalization of conditioned disgust. This is an important gap in the literature given that overgeneralization of conditioned disgust to neutral stimuli may have clinical implications. To address this knowledge gap, female participants (n = 80) completed a Pavlovian conditioning procedure in which one neutral food item (conditioned stimulus; CS+) was followed by disgusting videos of individuals vomiting (unconditioned stimulus; US) and another neutral food item (CS–) was not reinforced with the disgusting video. Following this acquisition phase, there was an extinction phase in which both CSs were presented unreinforced. Importantly, participants also evaluated generalization stimuli (GS+, GS?) that resembled, but were distinct from, the CS after each conditioning phase. As predicted, the CS+ was rated as significantly more disgusting and fear inducing than the CS? after acquisition and this pattern persisted after extinction. However, disgust ratings of the CS+ after acquisition were significantly larger than fear ratings. Participants also rated the GS+ as significantly more disgusting, but not fear inducing, than the GS? after acquisition. However, this effect was not observed after extinction. Disgust proneness did predict a greater increase in disgust and fear ratings of the CS+ relative to the CS? after acquisition and extinction. In contrast, trait anxiety predicted only higher fear ratings to the CS+ relative to the CS? after acquisition and extinction. Disgust proneness nor trait anxiety predicted the greater increase in disgust to the GS+ relative to the GS? after acquisition. These findings suggest that while conditioned disgust can generalize, individual difference variables that predict generalization remain unclear. The implications of these findings for disorders of disgust are discussed.     

Fear conditioning and extinction in anxiety- and depression-prone persons

Anxiety and depression frequently co-occur and may share similar deficits in the processing of emotional stimuli. High anxiety is associated with a failure in the acquisition and extinction of fear conditioning. Despite the supposed common deficits, no research has been conducted on fear acquisition and extinction in depression. The main aim of the present study was to investigate and compare fear acquisition and extinction in anxiety- and depression-prone participants. Non-clinical anxious, depressive, anxious-depressive and control participants performed a fear discrimination task. During acquisition, the CS+ predicted an aversive event (unconditioned stimulus, US) and the CS? safety (no US). During extinction, the CS+ was no longer followed by the US, rendering it (temporarily) into a safety signal. On each CS participants rated their US expectancy; skin conductance responses (SCRs) were measured throughout. The expectancy scores indicated that high anxiety resulted in less safety learning during acquisition and extinction; no effect of depression was observed. SCRs showed that high-anxiety persons displayed less discrimination learning (CS+ minus CS?) during acquisition than low-anxiety persons. During extinction, high-depression persons demonstrated more discriminative SCR than low-depression persons. The observed discrepancies in response patterns of high-anxiety and -depression persons seem to indicate distinctive information processing of emotional stimuli.