Although research has made significant advances in identifying treatments for fear-related disorders, these treatments are not entirely effective and relief from symptoms is often short-lived (Craske, 1999; McNally, 2007; Rachman, 1989). The research on which these treatments are based has largely focused on investigating processes by which fears are learned with an eye toward enhancing fear extinction. Less work, however, has examined safety stimuli (which denote the absence of threat) and whether specific types of safety stimuli have beneficial effects on fear extinction. One prevailing view is that safety signals are detrimental to the fear extinction process (Craske et al., 2008; Hermans, Craske, Mineka, & Lovibond, 2006), even though only a handful of studies using simplistic safety signals have tested these effects in humans (Lovibond, Davis, & O'Flaherty, 2000). Although there has been some discussion of the potential benefits of safety behaviors during exposure therapy (Rachman, Radomsky, & Shafran, 2008), protocols for the treatment of fear-related disorders generally warn against the presence of safety signals during therapy, including social-support figures even though their safety role had not been formally tested. However, recent findings suggest that this thinking may be misguided (Hornstein, Fanselow, & Eisenberger, 2016). Here, we examined whether one unique type of safety signal-social-support stimuli-can actually enhance fear extinction and whether these effects remain over time. The most common and effective method of treatment for maladaptive fears is exposure therapy, a procedure based on fear extinction processes. Yet fear extinction procedures in general, and exposure therapies in particular, are not always successful; fear reduction is often only temporary (

Objectives There is a strong association between supportive ties and health. However most research has focused on the health benefits that come from the support one receives while largely ignoring the support giver and how giving may contribute to good health. Moreover, few studies have examined the neural mechanisms associated with support giving or how giving support compares to receiving support. Method The current study assessed the relationships: 1) between self-reported receiving and giving social support and vulnerability for negative psychological outcomes and 2) between receiving and giving social support and neural activity to socially rewarding and stressful tasks. Thirty-six participants (M age=22.36, SD=3.78, 44% female) completed three tasks in the fMRI scanner: (1) a stress task (mental arithmetic under evaluative threat), (2) an affiliative task (viewing images of close others), and (3) a prosocial task. Results Both self-reported receiving and giving social support were associated with reduced vulnerability for negative psychological outcomes. However, across the three neuroimaging tasks, giving, but not receiving support was related to reduced stress-related activity (dorsal anterior cingulate cortex, (r=−.27), left (r=−.28) and right anterior insula (r=−.33), and left (r=−.32) and right amygdala (r=−.32) to a stress task, greater reward-related activity (left (r=.42) and right ventral striatum (VS; r=.41) to an affiliative task, and greater caregiving-related activity (left VS (r=.31), right VS (r=.31), and septal area (r=.39) to a prosocial task. Conclusion These results contribute to an emerging literature suggesting that support giving is an overlooked contributor to how social support can benefit health.

Self-compassion has been shown to have significant relationships with psychological health and well-being. Despite the increasing growth of research on the topic, no studies to date have investigated how self-compassion relates to neural responses to threats to the self. To investigate whether self-compassion relates to threat-regulatory mechanisms at the neural level of analysis, we conducted a functional MRI study in a sample of college-aged students. We hypothesized that self-compassion would relate to greater negative connectivity between the ventromedial prefrontal cortex (VMPFC) and amygdala during a social feedback task. Interestingly, we found a negative correlation between self-compassion and VMPFC-amygdala functional connectivity as predicted; however, this seemed to be due to low levels of self-compassion relating to greater positive connectivity in this circuit (rather than high levels of self-compassion relating to more negative connectivity). We also found significant relationships with multiple subcomponents of self-compassion (Common Humanity, Self-Judgment). These results shed light on how self-compassion might affect neural responses to threat and informs our understanding of the basic psychological regulatory mechanisms linking a lack of self-compassion with poor mental health. Self-compassion is defined as the tendency to be kind, warm, and understanding toward oneself in the midst of our pain and failures rather than being self-critical and over-identifying with negative emotions (Neff, 2003). Research on self-compassion has attracted increasing attention since it was first introduced in psychological science 15 years ago (Neff, 2003). While the importance of compassion directed toward the self has been recognized historically (Brach, 2004; Gunaratana, 2015; Kabat-Zinn, 1982; Salzberg, 1997), only recently have researchers sought to systematically understand its unique contributions for mental health and well-being (Macbeth & Gumley, 2012). Moreover, research in this area is beginning to establish connections between self-compassion and interpersonal functioning (e.g., Yarnell & Neff, 2013).