Heightened sensitivity to threat and reduced sensitivity to reward are potential mechanisms of dysfunction in anxiety and depressive disorders, respectively. However, few studies have simultaneously examined whether these mechanisms are unique or common to these disorders. In this study, sensitivity to predictable and unpredictable threat (measured by startle response during threat anticipation) and sensitivity to reward (measured by frontal electroencephalographic [EEG] asymmetry during reward anticipation) were assessed in 4 groups (N = 191): those with (1) panic disorder (PD) without a lifetime history of depression, (2) major depression (MDD) without a lifetime history of an anxiety disorder, (3) comorbid PD and MDD, and (4) controls. General distress/negative temperament (NT) was also assessed via self-report. Results indicated that PD (with or without comorbid MDD) was uniquely associated with heightened startle to predictable and unpredictable threat, and MDD (with or without comorbid PD) was uniquely associated with reduced frontal EEG asymmetry. Both psychophysiological measures of threat and reward sensitivity were stable on retest approximately 9 days later in a subsample of participants. Whereas the comorbid group did not respond differently on the tasks relative to the PD-only and MDD-only groups, they did report greater NT than these 2 groups (which did not differ from each other). Results suggest that heightened sensitivity to threat and reduced sensitivity to reward may be specific components of PD and MDD, respectively. In addition, relative to noncomorbid depression and PD, comorbid MDD and PD may be characterized by heightened NT, but not abnormal levels of these “specific” components.

Two emotional/motivational constructs that have been posited to underlie anxiety and depressive disorders are heightened sensitivity to threat and reduced sensitivity to reward, respectively. It is unclear, though, whether these constructs are only epiphenomena or also connote risk for these disorders (and relatedly, whether they connote risk for separate disorders). Using family history of psychopathology as an indicator of risk, the present study examined whether biomarkers of sensitivity to threat (startle potentiation) and reward (frontal EEG asymmetry) were associated with similar or different familial liabilities. In addition, the present study examined whether these biomarkers were associated with risk independent of proband DSM-IV diagnosis. One hundred seventy-three individuals diagnosed with panic disorder (PD), early-onset major depressive disorder (MDD), both (comorbids), or controls completed two laboratory paradigms assessing sensitivity to predictable/unpredictable threat (measured via startle response) and reward (measured via frontal EEG asymmetry during a gambling task). Results indicated that across all participants: 1) startle potentiation to unpredictable threat was associated with family history of PD (but not MDD) and 2) frontal EEG asymmetry while anticipating reward was associated with family history of MDD (but not PD). Additionally, both measures continued to be associated with family history of psychopathology after controlling for proband DSM-IV diagnosis. Results suggest that the proposed biomarkers of sensitivity to unpredictable threat and reward exhibit discriminant validity and may add to the predictive validity of the DSM-IV defined constructs of PD and MDD, respectively.

An important characteristic of aversive stimuli that determines emotional responses is whether the stimuli are predictable. Human laboratory studies in this area have typically operationalized predictability as being able to predict the occurrence of aversive events, but animal studies suggest that being able to predict other characteristics of the stimuli may also play a role in aversive responding. To examine this, the present study examined two characteristics: the timing and intensity of aversive stimuli. Specifically, participants were randomly assigned to receive shocks that were either predictable or unpredictable in terms of when they would occur (timing) and/or their intensity. Indicators of aversive emotional responses were EMG startle responses and subjective anxiety ratings. Results revealed that aversive responding was elevated for unpredictable timing and intensity suggesting that the predictability of both characteristics play a role in aversive responding (though the effects for timing were stronger). In sum, the anxiogenic effects of unpredictability may generalize to situations beyond unpredictable timing.

No abstract

Individuals with anxiety disorders have previously demonstrated abnormal habituation to aversiveness over time. As anxiety sensitivity (AS), or an individuals’ propensity to fear anxiety-related sensations, has been shown to be a risk factor for anxiety disorders (particularly panic disorder), the present study examined whether AS was also associated with abnormal habituation. This association was examined in two independent samples of undergraduates (total N=178). Habituation was operationalized as the reduction in startle response to multiple startle probes presented over 2.5 minutes and three definitions of this reduction were employed. Results indicated that individuals with higher levels of AS evidenced deficits in startle habituation, but the strength of this relationship was somewhat dependent on the definition of startle habituation, with the most robust definition being an analysis of participants’ individual slopes across all nine blinks. The present findings suggest that startle habituation is key mechanism underlying AS, and may help elucidate the role this risk factor plays in the pathogenesis of anxiety disorders.