Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation Does Not Accelerate Fear Extinction: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Study.

IF 2.9 2区 心理学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Martina D'Agostini, Lucas Vanden Bossche, Andreas M Burger, Ilse Van Diest
{"title":"Transcutaneous Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation Does Not Accelerate Fear Extinction: A Randomized, Sham-Controlled Study.","authors":"Martina D'Agostini, Lucas Vanden Bossche, Andreas M Burger, Ilse Van Diest","doi":"10.1111/psyp.14754","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has been tested as a strategy to facilitate fear extinction learning based on the hypothesis that taVNS increases central noradrenergic activity. Four studies out of six found taVNS to enhance extinction learning especially at the beginning of extinction. Facilitatory effects of taVNS were mainly observed in US expectancy, less in fear-potentiated startle (FPS), and not in the skin conductance response (SCR). Suboptimal stimulation parameters may explain the reported mixed results. Also, variability in selected fear conditioning paradigms and statistical power impedes the comparability between studies. This study sought to further test whether taVNS accelerates fear extinction learning as indexed by US expectancy, FPS, and SCR. Similar to most previous studies, we employed a differential fear conditioning paradigm. The left ear of 79 healthy participants was stimulated with either sham (earlobe) or taVNS (cymba concha) during extinction learning. To maximize the beneficial effects of taVNS, the stimulation of the left cymba concha was administered continuously at the maximum level below the pain threshold. Results of the pre-registered frequentist and exploratory Bayesian analyses indicate that taVNS did not accelerate extinction learning in any of the outcomes. The null results indicate that taVNS with commonly used stimulation parameters does not reliably optimize fear extinction learning. More research is needed to test if the stimulation protocol determines the efficacy of taVNS in optimizing fear extinction learning.</p>","PeriodicalId":20913,"journal":{"name":"Psychophysiology","volume":"62 1","pages":"e14754"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychophysiology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.14754","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) has been tested as a strategy to facilitate fear extinction learning based on the hypothesis that taVNS increases central noradrenergic activity. Four studies out of six found taVNS to enhance extinction learning especially at the beginning of extinction. Facilitatory effects of taVNS were mainly observed in US expectancy, less in fear-potentiated startle (FPS), and not in the skin conductance response (SCR). Suboptimal stimulation parameters may explain the reported mixed results. Also, variability in selected fear conditioning paradigms and statistical power impedes the comparability between studies. This study sought to further test whether taVNS accelerates fear extinction learning as indexed by US expectancy, FPS, and SCR. Similar to most previous studies, we employed a differential fear conditioning paradigm. The left ear of 79 healthy participants was stimulated with either sham (earlobe) or taVNS (cymba concha) during extinction learning. To maximize the beneficial effects of taVNS, the stimulation of the left cymba concha was administered continuously at the maximum level below the pain threshold. Results of the pre-registered frequentist and exploratory Bayesian analyses indicate that taVNS did not accelerate extinction learning in any of the outcomes. The null results indicate that taVNS with commonly used stimulation parameters does not reliably optimize fear extinction learning. More research is needed to test if the stimulation protocol determines the efficacy of taVNS in optimizing fear extinction learning.

经皮耳迷走神经刺激不会加速恐惧消退:一项随机、假对照研究。
经皮耳迷走神经刺激(taVNS)已被证明是一种促进恐惧消退学习的策略,该策略基于taVNS增加中枢去肾上腺素能活性的假设。六项研究中有四项发现,taVNS可以增强灭绝学习,尤其是在灭绝开始时。taVNS的促进作用主要见于美国预期,在恐惧增强惊吓(FPS)中较少,而在皮肤电导反应(SCR)中没有。次优的增产参数可能解释了报告的混合结果。此外,所选择的恐惧制约范式和统计能力的可变性阻碍了研究之间的可比性。本研究试图进一步测试taVNS是否加速了美国预期、FPS和SCR的恐惧消退学习。与大多数先前的研究类似,我们采用了差异恐惧条件反射范式。在消音学习过程中,对79名健康受试者的左耳分别施以假耳(耳垂)或耳鸣刺激。为了最大限度地发挥taVNS的有益作用,在疼痛阈值以下的最大水平连续刺激左颈琴。预注册频率分析和探索性贝叶斯分析的结果表明,taVNS在任何结果中都没有加速灭绝学习。无效结果表明,使用常用刺激参数的taVNS不能可靠地优化恐惧消退学习。刺激方案是否决定了taVNS在优化恐惧消退学习中的效果,还需要更多的研究来验证。
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
Psychophysiology
Psychophysiology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
8.10%
发文量
225
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Founded in 1964, Psychophysiology is the most established journal in the world specifically dedicated to the dissemination of psychophysiological science. The journal continues to play a key role in advancing human neuroscience in its many forms and methodologies (including central and peripheral measures), covering research on the interrelationships between the physiological and psychological aspects of brain and behavior. Typically, studies published in Psychophysiology include psychological independent variables and noninvasive physiological dependent variables (hemodynamic, optical, and electromagnetic brain imaging and/or peripheral measures such as respiratory sinus arrhythmia, electromyography, pupillography, and many others). The majority of studies published in the journal involve human participants, but work using animal models of such phenomena is occasionally published. Psychophysiology welcomes submissions on new theoretical, empirical, and methodological advances in: cognitive, affective, clinical and social neuroscience, psychopathology and psychiatry, health science and behavioral medicine, and biomedical engineering. The journal publishes theoretical papers, evaluative reviews of literature, empirical papers, and methodological papers, with submissions welcome from scientists in any fields mentioned above.
×
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