Partial Reinforcement and Conditioned Heart Rate Response in Human Subjects

Notterman, Joseph M.; Schoenfeld, W. N.; Bersh, Philip J.

doi:10.1126/science.115.2978.77

Cited by 26 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At the cardiac level, the aversive CS+ evoked more cardiac deceleration compared with the neutral CS+ after the first acquisition block in Study 1 and (marginally significantly) in Study 2. Because fear-conditioned CSs+ generally evoke cardiac deceleration or “fear bradycardia” (Notterman et al, 1952; Panitz et al, 2015; Sperl et al, 2016), this finding further supports successful imagery-based fear learning from Block 1 to Block 2. In addition, the two nonthreatening stimuli differed from each other; there was a relative acceleration to the neutral CS+ as opposed to the CS–, consistent with imagery tasks evoking cardiac acceleration (Vrana & Lang, 1990).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Aversive Imagery Causes De Novo Fear Conditioning

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In classical fear conditioning, neutral conditioned stimuli that have been paired with aversive physical unconditioned stimuli eventually trigger fear responses. Here, we tested whether aversive mental images systematically paired with a conditioned stimulus also cause de novo fear learning in the absence of any external aversive stimulation. In two experiments ( N = 45 and N = 41), participants were first trained to produce aversive, neutral, or no imagery in response to three different visual-imagery cues. In a subsequent imagery-based differential-conditioning paradigm, each of the three cues systematically coterminated with one of three different neutral faces. Although the face that was paired with the aversive-imagery cue was never paired with aversive external stimuli or threat-related instructions, participants rated it as more arousing, unpleasant, and threatening and displayed relative fear bradycardia and fear-potentiated startle. These results could be relevant for the development of fear and related disorders without trauma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Aversive Imagery Causes De Novo Fear Conditioning

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…US-alone control. Repeated presentations of the US alone are made in order to control for sensitization by, or habituation to, the US (Notterman, Schoenfeld, & Bersh, 1952;Wickens & Wickens, 1940).…”

Section: Traditional Control Proceduresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures.

Rescorla¹

1967

Psychological Review

1,329

720

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The traditional control procedures for Pavlovian conditioning are examined and each is found wanting. Some procedures introduce nonassociative factors not present in the experimental procedure while others transform the excitatory, experimental CS-US contingency into an inhibitory contingency. An alternative control procedure is suggested in which there is no contingency whatsoever between CS and US. This "truly random" control procedure leads to a new conception of Pavlovian conditioning postulating that the contingency between CS and US, rather than the pairing of CS and US, is the important event in conditioning. The fruitfulness of this new conception of Pavlovian conditioning is illustrated by 2 experimental results.

show abstract

“…Understanding mechanisms of human fear acquisition, extinction, and their consolidation is crucial to refine current models on emotional learning and improve treatment of anxiety disorders (Hofmann, 2008). Although the cardiac fear response has been an important psychophysiological index in fear conditioning studies for decades (e.g., Bradley, Moulder, & Lang, 2005;De Leon, 1964;L opez, Poy, Pastor, Segarra, & Molt o, 2009;Notterman, 1952), its underlying neural mechanisms are not well understood. However, understanding cardiac activity in fear is important, given that it (a) reflects a broad variety of central and peripheral autonomic influences (Berntson et al, 1997), (b) is crucial for the initiation of different behavioral responses (Berntson, Quigley, & Lozano, 2007), and (c) is an important indicator of psychosomatic health (Thayer, Ahs, Fredrikson, Sollers, & Wager, 2012).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A prominent CR component in response to fear-conditioned CS is the cardiac fear response. This response to nonnoxious threat stimuli typically includes an early (i.e., 2-6 s poststimulus) deceleration of the heart beat both in humans (Bradley et al, 2005;De Leon, 1964;Hugdahl, 1979;L opez et al, 2009;Notterman, 1952; but also see Hodes, Cook, & Lang, 1985) and animals (Applegate, Frysinger, & Kapp, 1982;Burhans, Smith-Bell, & Schreurs, 2010;Holdstock & Schwartzbaum, 1965;Kuniecki, Coenen, & Kaiser, 2002;Pascoe & Kapp, 1985). This deceleration has been commonly interpreted as an index of heightened vigilance and facilitation of sensory input of environmental stimuli (Lang & Bradley, 2010;Lang, Davis, & € Ohman, 2000;L€ ow, Lang, Smith, & Bradley, 2008).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Conditioned and extinguished fear modulate functional corticocardiac coupling in humans

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although the conditioned cardiac fear response is an important index of psychophysiological fear processing, underlying neural mechanisms remain unclear. N = 22 participants underwent differential fear conditioning and extinction with face pictures as conditioned stimuli (CS) and loud noise bursts as aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) on Day 1 and a recall test 1 day later. We assessed ERPs, evoked heart period (HP), and time-lagged within-subject correlations of single-trial EEG amplitude and HP as index for corticocardiac coupling in response to the CS. Fear-conditioned stimuli (CS+) triggered cardiac deceleration during fear acquisition and recall. Meanwhile, only during Day 1 acquisition, CS+ evoked larger late positivities in the ERP than CS-. Most importantly, during Day 2 recall, stimulus-evoked single-trial EEG responses in the time window between 250 and 500 ms predicted the magnitude of cardiac fear responses 2 to 5 s later. This marker of corticocardiac coupling selectively emerged in response to not previously extinguished CS+ but was absent in response to CS- or previously extinguished CS+. The present results provide first evidence that fear conditioning and extinction modulate functional corticocardiac coupling in humans. Underlying mechanisms may involve subcortical structures enhancing corticocardiac transmission to facilitate processing of consolidated conditioned fear.

show abstract

Partial Reinforcement and Conditioned Heart Rate Response in Human Subjects

Cited by 26 publications

References 4 publications

Aversive Imagery Causes De Novo Fear Conditioning

Aversive Imagery Causes De Novo Fear Conditioning

Pavlovian conditioning and its proper control procedures.

Conditioned and extinguished fear modulate functional corticocardiac coupling in humans

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About