Generalized Expectancy of Threat in Threatening compared to Safe Contexts.

Asimina Aslanidou, Marta Andreatta, Alex H K Wong, Matthias J Wieser
{"title":"Generalized Expectancy of Threat in Threatening compared to Safe Contexts.","authors":"Asimina Aslanidou, Marta Andreatta, Alex H K Wong, Matthias J Wieser","doi":"10.1093/scan/nsae097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fear of threatening contexts often generalizes to similar, safe contexts but few studies have investigated how contextual information influences cue generalization. In this study we explored whether fear responses to cues would generalize more broadly in a threatening compared to a safe context. Forty-seven participants underwent a differential cue-in-context conditioning protocol followed by a generalization test while we recorded psychophysiological and subjective responses. Two faces appeared on a computer screen in two contexts. One face (CS+) in the threat context (CTX+) was followed by a female scream 80% of the time, while another face (CS-) was not reinforced. No faces were reinforced in the safe context (CTX-). In the generalization test, the CSs and four morphs varying in similarity with the CS+ were presented in both contexts. During acquisition, conditioned responses to the cues was registered for all measures and the differential responding between CS+ and CS- was higher in CTX+ for US-expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses but the affective ratings and ssVEPs were not context-sensitive. During test, adaptive generalized responses were evident for all measures. Despite increased US-expectancy ratings in CTX+, participants exhibited similar cue generalization in both contexts, suggesting that threatening contexts do not influence cue generalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":94208,"journal":{"name":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social cognitive and affective neuroscience","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsae097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fear of threatening contexts often generalizes to similar, safe contexts but few studies have investigated how contextual information influences cue generalization. In this study we explored whether fear responses to cues would generalize more broadly in a threatening compared to a safe context. Forty-seven participants underwent a differential cue-in-context conditioning protocol followed by a generalization test while we recorded psychophysiological and subjective responses. Two faces appeared on a computer screen in two contexts. One face (CS+) in the threat context (CTX+) was followed by a female scream 80% of the time, while another face (CS-) was not reinforced. No faces were reinforced in the safe context (CTX-). In the generalization test, the CSs and four morphs varying in similarity with the CS+ were presented in both contexts. During acquisition, conditioned responses to the cues was registered for all measures and the differential responding between CS+ and CS- was higher in CTX+ for US-expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses but the affective ratings and ssVEPs were not context-sensitive. During test, adaptive generalized responses were evident for all measures. Despite increased US-expectancy ratings in CTX+, participants exhibited similar cue generalization in both contexts, suggesting that threatening contexts do not influence cue generalization.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信