Maren Klingelhöfer-Jens, Katharina Hutterer, Miriam A Schiele, Elisabeth J Leehr, Dirk Schümann, Karoline Rosenkranz, Joscha Böhnlein, Jonathan Repple, Jürgen Deckert, Katharina Domschke, Udo Dannlowski, Ulrike Lueken, Andreas Reif, Marcel Romanos, Peter Zwanzger, Paul Pauli, Matthias Gamer, Tina B Lonsdorf
{"title":"Reduced discrimination between signals of danger and safety but not overgeneralization is linked to exposure to childhood adversity in healthy adults.","authors":"Maren Klingelhöfer-Jens, Katharina Hutterer, Miriam A Schiele, Elisabeth J Leehr, Dirk Schümann, Karoline Rosenkranz, Joscha Böhnlein, Jonathan Repple, Jürgen Deckert, Katharina Domschke, Udo Dannlowski, Ulrike Lueken, Andreas Reif, Marcel Romanos, Peter Zwanzger, Paul Pauli, Matthias Gamer, Tina B Lonsdorf","doi":"10.7554/eLife.91425","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Childhood adversity is a strong predictor of developing psychopathological conditions. Multiple theories on the mechanisms underlying this association have been suggested which, however, differ in the operationalization of 'exposure.' Altered (threat) learning mechanisms represent central mechanisms by which environmental inputs shape emotional and cognitive processes and ultimately behavior. 1402 healthy participants underwent a fear conditioning paradigm (acquisition training, generalization), while acquiring skin conductance responses (SCRs) and ratings (arousal, valence, and contingency). Childhood adversity was operationalized as (1) dichotomization, and following (2) the specificity model, (3) the cumulative risk model, and (4) the dimensional model. Individuals exposed to childhood adversity showed blunted physiological reactivity in SCRs, but not ratings, and reduced CS+/CS- discrimination during both phases, mainly driven by attenuated CS+ responding. The latter was evident across different operationalizations of 'exposure' following the different theories. None of the theories tested showed clear explanatory superiority. Notably, a remarkably different pattern of increased responding to the CS- is reported in the literature for anxiety patients, suggesting that individuals exposed to childhood adversity may represent a specific sub-sample. We highlight that theories linking childhood adversity to (vulnerability to) psychopathology need refinement.</p>","PeriodicalId":11640,"journal":{"name":"eLife","volume":"12 ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11841987/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"eLife","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.91425","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Childhood adversity is a strong predictor of developing psychopathological conditions. Multiple theories on the mechanisms underlying this association have been suggested which, however, differ in the operationalization of 'exposure.' Altered (threat) learning mechanisms represent central mechanisms by which environmental inputs shape emotional and cognitive processes and ultimately behavior. 1402 healthy participants underwent a fear conditioning paradigm (acquisition training, generalization), while acquiring skin conductance responses (SCRs) and ratings (arousal, valence, and contingency). Childhood adversity was operationalized as (1) dichotomization, and following (2) the specificity model, (3) the cumulative risk model, and (4) the dimensional model. Individuals exposed to childhood adversity showed blunted physiological reactivity in SCRs, but not ratings, and reduced CS+/CS- discrimination during both phases, mainly driven by attenuated CS+ responding. The latter was evident across different operationalizations of 'exposure' following the different theories. None of the theories tested showed clear explanatory superiority. Notably, a remarkably different pattern of increased responding to the CS- is reported in the literature for anxiety patients, suggesting that individuals exposed to childhood adversity may represent a specific sub-sample. We highlight that theories linking childhood adversity to (vulnerability to) psychopathology need refinement.
期刊介绍:
eLife is a distinguished, not-for-profit, peer-reviewed open access scientific journal that specializes in the fields of biomedical and life sciences. eLife is known for its selective publication process, which includes a variety of article types such as:
Research Articles: Detailed reports of original research findings.
Short Reports: Concise presentations of significant findings that do not warrant a full-length research article.
Tools and Resources: Descriptions of new tools, technologies, or resources that facilitate scientific research.
Research Advances: Brief reports on significant scientific advancements that have immediate implications for the field.
Scientific Correspondence: Short communications that comment on or provide additional information related to published articles.
Review Articles: Comprehensive overviews of a specific topic or field within the life sciences.