Fear and safety learning in anxiety- and stress-related disorders: An updated meta-analysis

IF 7.5 1区 医学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Franziska M. Kausche , Hannes P. Carsten , Kim M. Sobania , Anja Riesel
{"title":"Fear and safety learning in anxiety- and stress-related disorders: An updated meta-analysis","authors":"Franziska M. Kausche ,&nbsp;Hannes P. Carsten ,&nbsp;Kim M. Sobania ,&nbsp;Anja Riesel","doi":"10.1016/j.neubiorev.2024.105983","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Fear learning processes are believed to play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of anxiety and stress-related disorders. To integrate results across different studies, we conducted a systematic meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines to examine differences in fear conditioning during fear acquisition, extinction, and extinction recall between individuals with anxiety-related or stress-related disorders and healthy participants. This analysis updates the work of Duits et al. (2015) while also refining distinctions between physiological and behavioral outcomes and examining extinction recall. Our meta-analysis encompasses 77 studies published from 1986 to 2022, involving 2052 patients with anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, and 3258 healthy controls. The results indicate significant differences in fear acquisition, extinction, and recall between the two groups. Specifically, during acquisition patients exhibited heightened physiological and behavioral responses to the CS- and reported increased affect ratings for the CS+ . During extinction and extinction recall, patients continue to show heightened threat expectancy and negative affect ratings towards the CS- and increased affect ratings towards the CS+ . No differences were found in CS+ /CS- differentiation between groups. These findings imply that individuals with anxiety and stress-related disorders may exhibit amplified responses to safety cues and stronger reactions to threat cues during fear conditioning, lasting through extinction and extinction recall. These changes may lead to increased sensitivity in detecting fear and slower extinction process, resulting in more enduring anxiety responses. We discuss these results in the context of existing literature on fear and safety learning and consider potential underlying mechanisms.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":56105,"journal":{"name":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","volume":"169 ","pages":"Article 105983"},"PeriodicalIF":7.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149763424004524","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fear learning processes are believed to play a crucial role in the development and maintenance of anxiety and stress-related disorders. To integrate results across different studies, we conducted a systematic meta-analysis following PRISMA guidelines to examine differences in fear conditioning during fear acquisition, extinction, and extinction recall between individuals with anxiety-related or stress-related disorders and healthy participants. This analysis updates the work of Duits et al. (2015) while also refining distinctions between physiological and behavioral outcomes and examining extinction recall. Our meta-analysis encompasses 77 studies published from 1986 to 2022, involving 2052 patients with anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, or post-traumatic stress disorder, and 3258 healthy controls. The results indicate significant differences in fear acquisition, extinction, and recall between the two groups. Specifically, during acquisition patients exhibited heightened physiological and behavioral responses to the CS- and reported increased affect ratings for the CS+ . During extinction and extinction recall, patients continue to show heightened threat expectancy and negative affect ratings towards the CS- and increased affect ratings towards the CS+ . No differences were found in CS+ /CS- differentiation between groups. These findings imply that individuals with anxiety and stress-related disorders may exhibit amplified responses to safety cues and stronger reactions to threat cues during fear conditioning, lasting through extinction and extinction recall. These changes may lead to increased sensitivity in detecting fear and slower extinction process, resulting in more enduring anxiety responses. We discuss these results in the context of existing literature on fear and safety learning and consider potential underlying mechanisms.
焦虑和压力相关障碍的恐惧和安全学习:一项更新的荟萃分析。
恐惧学习过程被认为在焦虑和压力相关疾病的发展和维持中起着至关重要的作用。为了整合不同研究的结果,我们根据PRISMA指南进行了系统的荟萃分析,以检查焦虑相关或压力相关障碍个体与健康参与者在恐惧习得、消退和消退回忆期间的恐惧条件反射的差异。该分析更新了Duits等人(2015)的工作,同时也细化了生理和行为结果之间的区别,并检查了灭绝回忆。我们的荟萃分析包括从1986年到2022年发表的77项研究,涉及2052名患有焦虑症、强迫症或创伤后应激障碍的患者,以及3258名健康对照。结果表明,两组在恐惧习得、消退和回忆方面存在显著差异。具体来说,在习得过程中,患者对CS-表现出更高的生理和行为反应,并报告了CS+的影响评级增加。在消退和消退回忆过程中,患者继续表现出更高的威胁预期和对CS-的负面影响评分,以及对CS+的负面影响评分。各组间CS+/CS-分化无差异。这些发现表明,焦虑和压力相关障碍的个体在恐惧条件反射过程中可能对安全线索表现出放大的反应,对威胁线索表现出更强的反应,并持续到消退和消退回忆。这些变化可能导致检测恐惧的敏感性增加,消除过程减慢,从而导致更持久的焦虑反应。我们在现有的关于恐惧和安全学习的文献背景下讨论这些结果,并考虑潜在的潜在机制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.20
自引率
3.70%
发文量
466
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The official journal of the International Behavioral Neuroscience Society publishes original and significant review articles that explore the intersection between neuroscience and the study of psychological processes and behavior. The journal also welcomes articles that primarily focus on psychological processes and behavior, as long as they have relevance to one or more areas of neuroscience.
×
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