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?

Extinction of negative conditioned stimulus valence in human fear conditioning

Fear conditioning is a common experimental paradigm for modelling the development, and exposure-based treatment, of anxiety disorders. Measures of fear such as threat-expectancy, physiological arousal, and fear ratings typically extinguish, however feared stimuli may still be evaluated negatively (i.e. retain negative valence). This systematic review provides the first investigation of the relationship between fear conditioning methodology and extinction of negative stimulus valence. Principal findings were that type of CS (conditioned stimulus) and the CS-US pairing (i.e. specific combination of CS and unconditioned stimulus) predicted extinction outcome. Extinction of absolute negative CS valence was always achieved with shape CSs; often achieved with low fear-relevant animals as CSs, and less frequently achieved with faces as CSs - particularly neutral faces paired with a shock US. Modified extinction procedures typically achieved the same outcome as standard extinction procedures, except for partially-reinforced extinction, which was less effective than standard extinction, and positive imagery training, which was more effective than standard extinction. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the influence of fear conditioning methodology on extinction of absolute negative CS valence.

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+.

Conditional stimulus choices affect fear learning: Comparing fear conditioning with neutral faces and shapes or angry faces

Past fear conditioning studies have used different types of conditional stimuli (CSs). Whether this choice affects learning outcomes in particular when neutral stimuli (e.g., neutral faces vs. shapes) are used is unclear. Data were aggregated across nine studies using an electric shock unconditional stimulus to test for differences in acquisition and extinction of electrodermal responses and self‐reported CS pleasantness when CSs were neutral faces or shapes (Experiment 1, N = 594) and when CSs were angry or neutral faces (Experiment 2, N = 157). Reliable electrodermal conditioning was observed in all stimulus conditions. We found stronger differential conditioning in electrodermal second interval responses and CS pleasantness and more pronounced extinction in CS pleasantness for neutral shape than neutral face CSs, but no differences in electrodermal first interval responses, the most frequently reported index of fear conditioning. For angry and neutral face CSs, there were no differences during acquisition, but the extinction of first and second interval electrodermal conditioning to angry faces was retarded relative to neutral faces. Acquisition of differential CS pleasantness, which was reliably observed for neutral face CSs, was absent for angry face CSs. The current results suggest that fear conditioning with a neutral face and shape CSs yields broadly similar results with differences limited to second interval electrodermal responses and CS pleasantness ratings. Using angry face CSs resulted in impaired extinction of electrodermal indices and no differential CS pleasantness ratings and should only be considered in studies designed to address questions about these specific CS materials.

Methodological choices like the nature of the conditional stimulus (CS) may affect fear learning. Here, we document in a very well powered analysis, that differences in fear conditioned to neutral face or shape CSs are limited to anticipatory electrodermal responses and self‐reported CS pleasantness but are not apparent in the more frequently reported electrodermal responses to CS onset. In contrast, differences in fear conditioned to angry and neutral face CSs emerge across indices of fear, in particular during extinction.

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.

Rating expectations can slow aversive reversal learning

The process of learning allows organisms to develop predictions about outcomes in the environment, and learning is sensitive to both simple associations and higher order knowledge. However, it is unknown whether consciously attending to expectations shapes the learning process itself. Here, we directly tested whether rating expectations shapes arousal during classical conditioning. Participants performed an aversive learning paradigm wherein one image (CS+) was paired with shock on 50% of trials, while a second image (CS-) was never paired with shock. Halfway through the task, contingencies reversed. One group of participants rated the probability of upcoming shock on each trial, while the other group made no online ratings. We measured skin conductance response (SCR) evoked in response to the CS and used traditional analyses as well as quantitative models of reinforcement learning to test whether rating expectations influenced arousal and aversive reversal learning. Participants who provided online expectancy ratings displayed slower learning based on a hybrid model of adaptive learning and reduced reversal of SCR relative to those who did not rate expectations. Mediation analysis revealed that the effect of associative learning on SCR could be fully explained through its effects on subjective expectancy within the group who provided ratings. This suggests that the act of rating expectations reduces the speed of learning, likely through changes in attention, and that expectations directly influence arousal. Our findings indicate that higher order expectancy judgments can alter associative learning.

Neural mediators of subjective and autonomic responding during threat learning and regulation

Threat learning elicits robust changes across multiple affective domains, including changes in autonomic indices and subjective reports of fear and anxiety. It has been argued that the underlying causes of such changes may be dissociable at a neural level, but there is currently limited evidence to support this notion. To address this, we examined the neural mediators of trial-by-trial skin conductance responses (SCR), and subjective reports of anxious arousal and valence in participants (n = 27; 17 females) performing a threat reversal task during ultra-high field functional magnetic resonance imaging. This allowed us to identify brain mediators during initial threat learning and subsequent threat reversal. Significant neural mediators of anxious arousal during threat learning included the dorsal anterior cingulate, anterior insula cortex (AIC), and ventromedial prefrontal cortex (vmPFC), subcortical regions including the amygdala, ventral striatum, caudate and putamen, and brain-stem regions including the pons and midbrain. By comparison, autonomic changes (SCR) were mediated by a subset of regions embedded within this broader circuitry that included the caudate, putamen and thalamus, and two distinct clusters within the vmPFC. The neural mediators of subjective negative valence showed prominent effects in posterior cortical regions and, with the exception of the AIC, did not overlap with threat learning task effects. During threat reversal, positive mediators of both subjective anxious arousal and valence mapped to the default mode network; this included the vmPFC, posterior cingulate, temporoparietal junction, and angular gyrus. Decreased SCR during threat reversal was positively mediated by regions including the mid cingulate, AIC, two sub-regions of vmPFC, the thalamus, and the hippocampus. Our findings add novel evidence to support distinct underlying neural processes facilitating autonomic and subjective responding during threat learning and threat reversal. The results suggest that the brain systems engaged in threat learning mostly capture the subjective (anxious arousal) nature of the learning process, and that appropriate responding during threat reversal is facilitated by participants engaging self- and valence-based processes. Autonomic changes (SCR) appear to involve distinct facilitatory and regulatory contributions of vmPFC sub-regions.