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。     

Trait Anxiety and Fear Responses to Safety Cues: Stimulus Generalization or Sensitization?

Abnormal fear responding to threat cues may contribute to the aetiology and maintenance of persistent fears and pathological anxiety. Chronic anxiety may also involve abnormal fear responding to ??safety?? cues, which do not signal danger. Yet investigations of fear responding to acquired safety cues are scarce and the basis of such responding remains unclear. Moreover, previous studies do not distinguish between stimulus generalization (an associative mechanism based on perceptual similarity between threat and safety cues) and sensitization (a non-associative mechanism whereby fear responses to any novel, intense, or fear-related stimulus are temporarily elevated). This study investigated responses to acquired safety cues in volunteers with varying trait anxiety, using a novel fear conditioning paradigm designed to distinguish between effects of trait anxiety on generalization and sensitization. The paradigm used three conditioned stimuli: a threat cue (CS+) and two safety cues (CS?), one perceptually similar to the CS+ and one perceptually dissimilar. Conditioned fear to these cues was indexed by fear potentiation of the startle blink reflex, skin conductance responses, and self-report. To examine how trait anxiety moderated responses to safety cues, participants were divided into high and low trait anxiety subgroups. Startle, skin conductance, and self-reported fear measures indicated that generalization of fear occurred for the safety cue which resembled the threat cue, but not for the perceptually dissimilar safety cue, consistent with the stimulus generalization hypothesis. There was some evidence that stimulus generalization was exaggerated in anxious individuals. The current study sheds light on the mechanism by which fear responses to safety cues arise in healthy individuals, and offers some insight into the influence of this mechanism in chronic anxiety.     

Potentiation of the acoustic startle response by a conditioned stimulus paired with acoustic startle stimulus in rats

The hypothesis that the standard acoustic startle habituation paradigm contains the elements of Pavlovian fear conditioning was tested. In a potentiated startle response paradigm, a startle stimulus and a light conditioned stimulus (CS) were paired. A startle stimulus then was tested alone or following the CS. Freezing behavior was measured to index conditioned fear. The startle response was potentiated on CS trials, and rats froze more in CS than in non-CS periods. In Experiment 1, response to a previously habituated, weak startle stimulus was potentiated. In Experiment 2, response to the same stimulus used as the unconditioned stimulus (US) in training was potentiated. This CS-potentiated response retarded the course of response decrements over training sessions as compared with an explictly unpaired control group. Conditioned fear is a standard feature of this habituation paradigm, serves to potentiate the startle response, and provides an associative dimension lacking in the habituation process per se.     

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。     

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.     

Conditioned fear extinction and reinstatement in a human fear-potentiated startle paradigm

The purpose of this study was to analyze fear extinction and reinstatement in humans using fear-potentiated startle. Participants were fear conditioned using a simple discrimination procedure with colored lights as the conditioned stimuli (CSs) and an airblast to the throat as the unconditioned stimulus (US). Participants were extinguished 24 h after fear conditioning. Upon presentation of unsignaled USs after extinction, participants displayed significant fear reinstatement. In summary, these procedures produced robust fear-potentiated startle, significant CS+/CS- discrimination, within-session extinction, and significant reinstatement. This is the first demonstration of fear extinction and reinstatement in humans using startle measures.     

Measuring the role of conditioning and stimulus generalisation in common fears and worries

Common and persistent fears may emerge through learning mechanisms such as fear conditioning and generalisation. Although there have been extensive studies of these learning processes in healthy but also psychiatric samples, many of the tasks used to produce conditioning and assess generalisation either use painful and aversive stimuli as the unconditioned stimuli (UCS), or suffer from poor belongingness between the conditioned stimuli and the UCS. Here, we present novel data from a paradigm designed to examine fear conditioning and generalisation in healthy individuals. Two female faces served as conditioned threat cue (CS+) and conditioned safety cue (CS?) respectively. The CS+ was paired repeatedly with a fearful, screaming face (unconditioned stimulus). Generalisation included intermediate faces which varied in their similarity to the CS+ and CS?. We measured eyeblink startle reflex and self-reported ratings. Acquired fear of the CS+ generalised to intermediate stimuli in proportion to their perceptual similarity to the CS+. Our findings demonstrate how fears of new individuals may develop based on resemblance to others with whom an individual has had negative experiences. The paradigm offers new opportunities for probing the role of generalisation in the emergence of common and persistent fears.     

分类和概念对恐惧泛化的影响机制

恐惧泛化与多种焦虑障碍的病理基础密切相关。例如创伤后应激障碍个体往往持续地逃避与创伤事件有关的刺激,遭受着创伤痛苦折磨。本文在厘清知觉辨别与恐惧泛化关系的基础上,着力于高级认知过程(分类与概念相似性、典型性和人工概念)对恐惧泛化的影响,回顾了恐惧泛化的相关神经机制,并揭示恐惧泛化对焦虑障碍患者的临床治疗启示。未来研究应将知觉和高级认知维度的恐惧泛化进行整合研究,同时扩充恐惧习得和泛化的神经回路,以促进人类恐惧泛化更深入的研究。     

Fearing shades of grey: individual differences in fear responding towards generalisation stimuli

Individual differences in fear generalisation have been proposed to play a role in the aetiology and/or maintenance of anxiety disorders, but few data are available to directly support that claim. The research that is available has focused mostly on generalisation of peripheral and central physiological fear responses. Far less is known about the generalisation of avoidance, the behavioural component of fear. In two experiments, we evaluated how neuroticism, a known vulnerability factor for anxiety, modulates an array of fear responses, including avoidance tendencies, towards generalisation stimuli (GS). Participants underwent differential fear conditioning, in which one conditioned stimulus (CS+) was repeatedly paired with an aversive outcome (shock; unconditioned stimulus, US), whereas another was not (CS?). Fear generalisation was observed across measures in Experiment 1 (US expectancy and evaluative ratings) and Experiment 2 (US expectancy, evaluative ratings, skin conductance, startle responses, safety behaviours), with overall highest responding to the CS+, lowest to the CS? and intermediate responding to the GSs. Neuroticism had very little impact on fear generalisation (but did affect GS recognition rates in Experiment 1), in line with the idea that fear generalisation is largely an adaptive process.     

Neural substrates of individual differences in human fear learning: Evidence from concurrent fMRI, fear-potentiated startle, and US-expectancy data

To provide insight into individual differences in fear learning, we examined the emotional and cognitive expressions of discriminative fear conditioning in direct relation to its neural substrates. Contrary to previous behavioral-neural (fMRI) research on fear learning--in which the emotional expression of fear was generally indexed by skin conductance--we used fear-potentiated startle, a more reliable and specific index of fear. While we obtained concurrent fear-potentiated startle, neuroimaging (fMRI), and US-expectancy data, healthy participants underwent a fear-conditioning paradigm in which one of two conditioned stimuli (CS(+) but not CS(-)) was paired with a shock (unconditioned stimulus [US]). Fear learning was evident from the differential expressions of fear (CS(+) > CS(-)) at both the behavioral level (startle potentiation and US expectancy) and the neural level (in amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, and insula). We examined individual differences in discriminative fear conditioning by classifying participants (as conditionable vs. unconditionable) according to whether they showed successful differential startle potentiation. This revealed that the individual differences in the emotional expression of discriminative fear learning (startle potentiation) were reflected in differential amygdala activation, regardless of the cognitive expression of fear learning (CS-US contingency or hippocampal activation). Our study provides the first evidence for the potential of examining startle potentiation in concurrent fMRI research on fear learning.     

Reinstatement of fear in humans: autonomic and experiential responses in a differential conditioning paradigm

The present study investigated reinstatement of fear in humans using an aversive differential conditioning paradigm. Two neutral human face pictures were presented during habituation, acquisition, extinction, and postreinstatement phases. One picture served as a conditioned stimulus (CS) reinforced by an unconditioned stimulus (US) in the form of electrical stimulation (CS+) and the second picture as a control stimulus that was never reinforced (CS-). The prediction that in a reinstatement manipulation a previously extinguished fear response in humans can be reinstated in a reinstatement group by the mere presentation of three unpredicted electrical stimulations (USs) was tested. Participants in the control group were not exposed to unpredicted USs and no reinstatement effect was expected. Outcome measures included subjective US expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses. Results showed non-selective return of the fear response due to fear recovery associated with both CSs (CS+/CS-) in the reinstatement group. Unexpected fear recovery was observed for both CSs (CS+/CS-) in control participants. Results are discussed with respect to context conditioning, fear generalisation, and anxiety-related cognitive mechanisms underlying fear recovery after extinction.     

Differential acquisition,extinction, and reinstatement of conditioned suppression in mice

In animals, the reappearance of conditioned fear responses after extinction has been primarily investigated using single-cue conditioning paradigms. However, a differential paradigm can overcome several of the disadvantages associated with a single-cue procedure. In the present study, the reinstatement phenomenon was assessed in mice using a differential conditioned suppression paradigm. In a first phase, one conditioned stimulus (CS + ) was consistently paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US; footshock) while another CS (CS–) was not, resulting in selective suppression of previously trained instrumental behaviour during the CS + . After the extinction phase, half of the animals (reinstatement group) were presented with unsignalled USs, while the other half were not (control group). A differential return of conditioned responding was observed in the reinstatement group, but not in the control group. The implications of these findings for future conditioning research are discussed.     

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。     

Differential acquisition, extinction, and reinstatement of conditioned suppression in mice

In animals, the reappearance of conditioned fear responses after extinction has been primarily investigated using single-cue conditioning paradigms. However, a differential paradigm can overcome several of the disadvantages associated with a single-cue procedure. In the present study, the reinstatement phenomenon was assessed in mice using a differential conditioned suppression paradigm. In a first phase, one conditioned stimulus (CS + ) was consistently paired with an unconditioned stimulus (US; footshock) while another CS (CS-) was not, resulting in selective suppression of previously trained instrumental behaviour during the CS + . After the extinction phase, half of the animals (reinstatement group) were presented with unsignalled USs, while the other half were not (control group). A differential return of conditioned responding was observed in the reinstatement group, but not in the control group. The implications of these findings for future conditioning research are discussed.     

Fear expression and return of fear following threat instruction with or without direct contingency experience

Prior research showed that mere instructions about the contingency between a conditioned stimulus (CS) and an unconditioned stimulus (US) can generate fear reactions to the CS. Little is known, however, about the extent to which actual CS–US contingency experience adds anything beyond the effect of contingency instructions. Our results extend previous studies on this topic in that it included fear potentiated startle as an additional dependent variable and examined return of fear (ROF) following reinstatement. We observed that CS–US pairings can enhance fear reactions beyond the effect of contingency instructions. Moreover, for all measures of fear, instructions elicited immediate fear reactions that could not be completely overridden by subsequent situational safety information. Finally, ROF following reinstatement for instructed CS+s was unaffected by actual experience. In summary, our results demonstrate the power of contingency instructions and reveal the additional impact of actual experience of CS–US pairings.     

Disrupting reconsolidation: pharmacological and behavioral manipulations

We previously demonstrated that disrupting reconsolidation by pharmacological manipulations "deleted" the emotional expression of a fear memory in humans. If we are to target reconsolidation in patients with anxiety disorders, the disruption of reconsolidation should produce content-limited modifications. At the same time, the fear-erasing effects should not be restricted to the feared cue itself considering that fear generalization is a main characteristic of anxiety disorders. In Experiment I and Experiment I(b), we addressed these issues using a within-subject differential startle fear conditioning paradigm and a test of fear generalization. In Experiment II, we tested whether a behavioral approach targeting the reconsolidation through extinction learning was also effective in weakening the original fear memory. A behavioral procedure is evidently preferred over drug manipulations provided that similar effects can be obtained. Here, the extinction procedure subsequent to retrieval did not "erase" the emotional expression of the fear memory as the retrieval techniques (i.e., reminder shocks and reacquisition) unveiled a return of the startle fear response to the fear-relevant stimuli. In contrast, β-adrenergic receptor blockade during reconsolidation selectively deleted the fear-arousing aspects of the memory (i.e., startle fear response) along with its category-related information. The pharmacological manipulation rendered the core memory trace too weak to observe fear generalization after successful reacquisition. Hence, relearning following the disruption of reconsolidation seems to be qualitatively different from initial learning. Our findings demonstrate that disrupting reconsolidation by pharmacological manipulations, although selective, undermines the generalization of fear, a key feature of anxiety disorders.     

Generalization of conditioned fear along a dimension of increasing fear intensity

The present study investigated the extent to which fear generalization in humans is determined by the amount of fear intensity in nonconditioned stimuli relative to a perceptually similar conditioned stimulus. Stimuli consisted of graded emotionally expressive faces of the same identity morphed between neutral and fearful endpoints. Two experimental groups underwent discriminative fear conditioning between a face stimulus of 55% fear intensity (conditioned stimulus, CS+), reinforced with an electric shock, and a second stimulus that was unreinforced (CS−). In Experiment 1 the CS− was a relatively neutral face stimulus, while in Experiment 2 the CS− was the most fear-intense stimulus. Before and following fear conditioning, skin conductance responses (SCR) were recorded to different morph values along the neutral-to-fear dimension. Both experimental groups showed gradients of generalization following fear conditioning that increased with the fear intensity of the stimulus. In Experiment 1 a peak shift in SCRs extended to the most fear-intense stimulus. In contrast, generalization to the most fear-intense stimulus was reduced in Experiment 2, suggesting that discriminative fear learning procedures can attenuate fear generalization. Together, the findings indicate that fear generalization is broadly tuned and sensitive to the amount of fear intensity in nonconditioned stimuli, but that fear generalization can come under stimulus control. These results reveal a novel form of fear generalization in humans that is not merely based on physical similarity to a conditioned exemplar, and may have implications for understanding generalization processes in anxiety disorders characterized by heightened sensitivity to nonthreatening stimuli.Fear generalization occurs when a fear response acquired to a particular stimulus transfers to another stimulus. Generalization is often an adaptive function that allows an organism to rapidly respond to novel stimuli that are related in some way to a previously learned stimulus. Fear generalization, however, can be maladaptive when nonthreatening stimuli are inappropriately treated as harmful, based on similarity to a known threat. For example, an individual may acquire fear of all dogs after an aversive experience with a single vicious dog. In this case, recognizing that a novel animal is related to a feared (or fear-conditioned) animal is made possible in part by shared physical features to the fear exemplar, such as four legs and a tail. On the other hand, fear generalization may be selective for those features that are associated with natural categories of threat; a harmless dog may not pose a threat, but possesses naturally threatening features common to other threatening animals, such as sharp teeth and claws. Moreover, the degree to which an individual fearful of dogs responds with fear may be related to either the physical similarity to the originally feared animal (e.g., from a threatening black dog to another black dog), or the intensity of those threatening features relative to the originally feared animal (e.g., sharp teeth from one animal to sharp teeth of another animal). Therefore, fear generalization based on perceptual information may occur via two routes—similarity to a learned fear exemplar along nonthreatening physical dimensions or along dimensions of fear relevance. Given that fear generalization often emerges as a consequence of conditioning or observational learning, it is important to determine which characteristics of novel stimuli facilitate fear generalization and the extent to which generalization processes can be controlled.Early explanations of stimulus generalization emphasized that an organism''s ability to generalize to nonconditioned stimuli is related to both the similarity and discriminability to a previously conditioned stimulus (CS) (Hull 1943; Lashley and Wade 1946). While Lashley and Wade (1946) argued that generalization was simply a failure of discriminating between a nonconditioned stimulus (CS−) and the reinforced CS (CS+), contemporary views contend that generalization enables learning to extend to stimuli that are readily perceptually distinguished from the CS (Pearce 1987; Shepard 1987; McLaren and Mackintosh 2002). This latter view has been supported by empirical studies of stimulus generalization in laboratory animals (Guttman and Kalish 1956; Honig and Urcuioli 1981). In these studies, animals were reinforced for responding to a CS of a specific physical quality such as color, and then tested with several different values along the same stimulus dimension as the CS (e.g., at various wavelengths along the color spectrum). Orderly gradients of responses are often reported that peak at or near the reinforced value and decrease as a function of physical similarity to the CS along the stimulus dimension (Honig and Urcuioli 1981). Further generalization was shown to extend from the CS+ to discriminable nonconditioned stimuli, suggesting that generalization is not bound to the organism''s ability to discriminate stimuli (Guttman and Kalish 1956, 1958; Shepard 1987).Interestingly, when animals learn to distinguish between a CS+ and a CS−, the peak of behavioral responses often shift to a new value along the dimension that is further away from the CS− (Hanson 1959). For instance, when being trained to discriminate a green CS+ and an orange CS−, pigeons will key peck more to a greenish-blue color than the actual CS+ hue. Intradimensional generalization of this sort is reduced when animals are trained to discriminate between two or more stimulus values that are relatively close during conditioning (e.g., discriminating a green-yellow CS+ from a green-blue CS−), suggesting that the extent of generalization can come under stimulus control through reinforcement learning (Jenkins and Harrison 1962). Spence (1937) described the transposition of response magnitude as an effect of interacting gradients of excitation and inhibition formed around the CS+ and CS−, respectively, which summate to shift responses to values further from the inhibitory CS− gradient. In all, early theoretical and empirical treatments of stimulus generalization in nonhuman animals revealed that behavior transfers to stimuli that are physically similar, but can be discriminated from a CS, and that differential reinforcement training can both sharpen the stimulus gradient and shift the peak of responses to a nonreinforced value.Although this rich literature has revealed principles of generalization in nonhuman animals, few studies of fear generalization have been conducted in humans (for review, see Honig and Urcuioli 1981; Ghirlanda and Enquist 2003). Moreover, the existing human studies have yet to consider the second route through which fear responses may generalize—via gradients of fear relevance. While a wide range of neutral stimuli, such as tones or geometric figures, can acquire fear relevance through conditioning processes, other stimuli, such as threatening faces or spiders, are biologically prepared to be fear relevant (Lanzetta and Orr 1980; Dimberg and Öhman 1996; Whalen et al. 1998; Öhman and Mineka 2001). Compared with fear-irrelevant CSs, biologically prepared stimuli capture attention (Öhman et al. 2001), are conditioned without awareness (Öhman et al. 1995; Öhman and Soares 1998), increase brain activity in visual and emotional processing regions (Sabatinelli et al. 2005), and become more resistant to extinction when paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) (Öhman et al. 1975). Although the qualitative nature of the CS influences acquisition and expression of conditioned fear, it is unknown how generalization proceeds along a gradient of natural threat. For instance, human studies to date have all tested variations of a CS along physically neutral stimulus dimensions, such as tone frequency (Hovland 1937), geometric shape (Vervliet et al. 2006), and physical size (Lissek et al. 2008). These investigations implicitly assume that the generalization gradient is independent of the conditioned value (equipotentiality principle). In other words, since the stimuli are all equally neutral prior to fear learning, fear generalization operates solely as a function of similarity along the reinforced physical dimension. However, since fear learning is predisposed toward fear-relevant stimuli, generalization may be selective to those shared features between a CS+ and CS− that are associated with natural categories of threat. Examining generalization using fear-relevant stimuli is thus important to gain better ecological validity and to develop a model system for studying maladaptive fear generalization in individuals who may express exaggerated fear responses to nonthreatening stimuli following a highly charged aversive experience (i.e., post-traumatic stress disorder or specific phobias).To address this issue, the present study examined generalization to fearful faces along an intradimensional gradient of fear intensity. A fearful face is considered a biologically prepared stimulus that recruits sensory systems automatically for rapid motor responses (Öhman and Mineka 2001), and detecting fearful faces may be evolutionarily selected as an adaptive response to social signals of impending danger (Lanzetta and Orr 1980; Dimberg and Öhman 1996). During conditioning, an ambiguous face containing 55% fear intensity (CS+) was paired with an electric shock US, while a relatively neutral face (11% fear intensity) was explicitly unreinforced (CS−) (Experiment 1). Skin conductance responses (SCR) were recorded as a dependent measure of fear conditioning. Before and following fear conditioning, SCRs were recorded in response to face morphs of the same actor expressing several values of increasing fear intensity (from 11% to 100%; see Fig. 1). A total of five values along the continuum were used: 11% fear/88% neutral, 33% fear/66% neutral, 55% fear/44% neutral, 77% fear/22% neutral, and 100% fear. For clarity, these stimuli are herein after labeled as S1, S2, S3, S4, and S5, respectively.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Experimental design. (A) Pre-conditioning included six presentations of all five stimulus values without the US. (B) Fear conditioning involved discriminative fear learning between the S3, paired with the US (CS+), and either the unreinforced S1 (Experiment 1) or the unreinforced S5 (Experiment 2) (CS−). (C) The generalization test included nine presentations of all five stimuli (45 total), with three out of nine S3 trials reinforced with the US. Stimuli are not drawn to scale.Testing generalization along an intradimensional gradient of emotional expression intensity allows for an examination of the relative contributions of fear intensity and physical similarity on the magnitude of generalized fear responses. If fear generalization is determined purely by the perceptual overlap between the CS+ and other morph values, without regard to fear intensity, then we would expect a bell-shaped generalization function with the maximum SCR centered on the reinforced (intermediate) CS+ value (S3), less responding to the directly adjacent, but most perceptually similar values (S2 and S4), and the least amount of responding to the most distal and least perceptually similar morph values (S1 and S5). This finding would be in line with stimulus generalization reported along fear-irrelevant dimensions (Lissek et al. 2008) and in stimulus generalization studies using appetitive instrumental learning procedures (Guttman and Kalish 1956). If, however, fear generalization is biased toward nonconditioned stimuli of high fear intensity, then an asymmetric generalization function should result with maximal responding to the most fear-intense nonconditioned stimuli. This finding would suggest that fear generalization is selective to the degree of fear intensity in stimuli, similar to studies of physical intensity generalization gradients in nonhuman animals (Ghirlanda and Enquist 2003). We predicted that the latter effect would be observed, such that the magnitude of SCRs will disproportionately generalize to stimuli possessing a greater degree of fear intensity than the CS+ (Experiment 1). A secondary goal was to determine whether fear generalization to nonconditioned stimuli can be reduced through discriminative fear learning processes. Therefore, a second group of participants was run for whom the CS− was the 100% fearful face (Experiment 2). In this case, we predicted that discriminative fear conditioning between the CS+ (55% intensity) and the most fear-intense nonconditioned stimulus would sharpen the generalization gradient around the reinforced CS+ value, and that responses to the most fear-intense stimulus would decrease relative to Experiment 1. Moreover, this discriminative fear-learning process may provide evidence that fear generalization is influenced by associative learning processes and is not exclusively driven by selective sensitization to stimuli of high fear relevance (Lovibond et al. 1993). Finally, we were interested to discover whether generalization processes would yield subsequent false memory for the intensity of the CS+ in a post-experimental retrospective report. In sum, the present study has implications for understanding how fear generalization is related to the degree of fear intensity of a nonconditioned stimulus, the extent to which discrimination training efforts can thwart the generalization process, and how fear generalization affects stimulus recognition.     

The spread of fear: Symbolic generalization mediates graded threat-avoidance in specific phobia

Overgeneralization of fear and threat-avoidance represents a formidable barrier to successful clinical treatment of anxiety disorders. While stimulus generalization along quantifiable physical dimensions has been studied extensively, less consideration has been given to symbolic generalization, in which stimuli are indirectly and arbitrarily related. The present study examined whether the magnitude and extent of symbolic generalization of threat-avoidance and threat-beliefs differed between spider-phobic and nonphobic individuals. Initially, participants learned two sets of stimulus equivalence relations (A1?=?B1?=?C1; A2?=?B2?=?C2). Next, one cue (B1) was established as a conditioned stimulus (CS?+?; threat) that signalled onset of spider images and prompted avoidance, and another cue (B2) was established as a CS– (safety cue) that signalled the absence of such images. Subsequent testing showed that phobics compared to nonphobics exhibited greater symbolic generalization of threat-avoidance to threat cues A1 and C1 (indirect CS+ threat cues related via symmetry and equivalence, respectively), while all individuals showed nonavoidance to indirect safety cues A2 and C2. The enhanced symbolic generalization of threat-beliefs and avoidance behaviour observed in spider phobics warrants further investigation.     

Observational fear conditioning in the acquisition and extinction of attentional bias for threat: an experimental evaluation

Anxious persons show automatic and strategic attentional biases for threatening information. Yet, the mechanisms and processes that underlie such biases remain unclear. The central aim of the present study was to elucidate the relation between observational threat learning and the acquisition and extinction of biased threat processing by integrating emotional Stroop color naming tasks within an observational differential fear conditioning procedure. Forty-three healthy female participants underwent several consecutive observational fear conditioning phases. During acquisition, participants watched a confederate displaying mock panic attacks (UCS) paired with a verbal stimulus (CS+), but not with a second nonreinforced verbal stimulus (CS-). As expected, participants showed greater magnitude electrodermal and verbal-evaluative (e.g., distress, fear) conditioned responses to the CS+ over the CS- word. Participants also demonstrated slower color-naming latencies to CS+ compared to the CS- word following acquisition and showed attenuation of this preferential processing bias for threat following extinction. Findings are discussed broadly in the context of the interplay between fear learning and processing biases for threat as observed in persons suffering from anxiety disorders.     

Post-extinction conditional stimulus valence predicts reinstatement fear: Relevance for long-term outcomes of exposure therapy

Exposure therapy for anxiety disorders is translated from fear conditioning and extinction. While exposure therapy is effective in treating anxiety, fear sometimes returns after exposure. One pathway for return of fear is reinstatement: unsignaled unconditional stimuli following completion of extinction. The present study investigated the extent to which valence of the conditional stimulus (CS+) after extinction predicts return of CS+ fear after reinstatement. Participants (N = 84) engaged in a differential fear conditioning paradigm and were randomised to reinstatement or non-reinstatement. We hypothesised that more negative post-extinction CS+ valence would predict higher CS+ fear after reinstatement relative to non-reinstatement and relative to extinction retest. Results supported the hypotheses and suggest that strategies designed to decrease negative valence of the CS+ may reduce the return of fear via reinstatement following exposure therapy.