Programmat!e voor de Belgische land- en tuinbauw tot 1970.

(Iandbouw-Economisch nstituut-Schriften . Nr. 10/R-2)

Human fear conditioning is moderated by stimulus contingency instructions

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

Tackling fear: Beyond associative memory activation as the only determinant of fear responding.

For decades already, the human fear conditioning paradigm has been used to study and develop treatments for anxiety disorders. This research is guided by theoretical assumptions that, in some cases indirectly, stem from the tradition of association formation models (e.g., the Rescorla-Wagner model). We argue that one of these assumptions – fear responding as a monotonic function of the associative activation of aversive memory representations – restricts the types of treatment that the research community currently considers. We discuss the importance of this assumption in the context of research on extinction-enhancing and reconsolidation interference techniques. While acknowledging the merit of this research, we argue that unstrapping the straitjacket of this assumption can lead to exploring new directions for utilizing fear conditioning procedures in treatment research. We discuss two determinants of fear responding other than associative memory activation. First, fear responding might also depend on relational information. Second, a recent goal-directed emotion theory suggests that goals might be the primary determinant of the response pattern characterized as fear.status: publishe

Human fear conditioning is moderated by stimulus contingency instructions

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

A review on the effects of verbal instructions in human fear conditioning

Fear learning reflects the adaptive ability to learn to anticipate aversive events and to display preparatory fear reactions based on prior experiences. Usually, these learning experiences are modeled in the lab with pairings between a neutral conditioned stimulus (CS) and an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) (i.e., fear conditioning via CS-US pairings). Nevertheless, for humans, fear learning can also be based on verbal instructions. In this review, we consider the role of verbal instructions in laboratory fear learning. Specifically, we consider both the effects of verbal instructions on fear responses in the absence of CS-US pairings as well as the way in which verbal instructions moderate fear established via CS-US pairings. We first focus on the available empirical findings about both types of effects. More specifically, we consider how these effects are moderated by elements of the fear conditioning procedure (i.e., the stimuli, the outcome measures, the relationship between the stimuli, the participants, and the broader context). Thereafter, we discuss how well different mental-process models of fear learning account for these empirical findings. Finally, we conclude the review with a discussion of open questions and opportunities for future research

Tackling fear: Beyond associative memory activation as the only determinant of fear responding

For decades already, the human fear conditioning paradigm has been used to study and develop treatments for anxiety disorders. This research is guided by theoretical assumptions that, in some cases indirectly, stem from the tradition of association formation models (e.g., the Rescorla-Wagner model). We argue that one of these assumptions – fear responding as a monotonic function of the associative activation of aversive memory representations – restricts the types of treatment that the research community currently considers. We discuss the importance of this assumption in the context of research on extinction-enhancing and reconsolidation interference techniques. While acknowledging the merit of this research, we argue that unstrapping the straitjacket of this assumption can lead to exploring new directions for utilizing fear conditioning procedures in treatment research. We discuss two determinants of fear responding other than associative memory activation. First, fear responding might also depend on relational information. Second, a recent goal-directed emotion theory suggests that goals might be the primary determinant of the response pattern characterized as fear