82 research outputs found
The generalization of threat beliefs to novel safety stimuli induced by safety behaviors
No full texthttp://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100003246 Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoe
The degree of safety behaviors to a safety stimulus predicts development of threat beliefs
Full text linkSafety behaviors are behavioral responses that aim to prevent or minimize an imminent threat when confronting a feared stimulus. Despite its adaptive purpose, preliminary evidence suggests that unnecessary safety behaviors to a safety stimulus induce threat beliefs to it. By allowing participants to engage in safety behaviors dimensionally, this study tested whether the degree of safety behaviors to a safety stimulus predicts the subsequent level of threat expectancies to it. To this end, participants first acquired safety behaviors to a threat-related stimulus (A). Safety behaviors then became available only for one safety stimulus (C), but not to another safety stimulus (B). After engaging in safety behaviors to C, participants exhibited greater threat expectancies to C compared to B, albeit with a small effect size. Importantly, the degree of safety behaviors predicted an increase in threat expectancies. The current findings suggest that safety behaviors to safety stimuli are linked to the development of threat beliefs.</p
Reducing the return of avoidance and fear by directly targeting avoidance:Comparing incentive-based and instructed extinction of avoidance to passive fear extinction
Full text linkEnhancing the reduction of avoidance may optimize treatment for anxiety disorders. Past research focused on boosting fear extinction to reduce avoidance, however, with limited success. Directly extinguishing avoidance may be more promising. This preregistered study tested the impact of incentives and instruction for non-avoidance compared to passive fear extinction on long-term avoidance and fear reduction. On Day 1, participants acquired conditioned fear and avoidance to a conditioned stimulus (CS) paired with an aversive outcome. Next, incentives or instructions encouraged non-avoidance to the CS, which was no longer reinforced by a US regardless of avoidance (Incentives and Instruction group). In a third group, avoidance was unavailable and the CS was passively presented in absence of the US (Passive Fear Extinction group). On Day 2, avoidance retention and reinstatement and return of fear were tested. In the short term, incentives and instruction strongly reduced avoidance with similar fear reduction compared to passive fear extinction. Importantly, incentives and instruction were linked to lower long-term avoidance retention. Avoidance reinstatement was evident in all groups, but avoidance remained higher after passive fear extinction. Finally, incentives yielded a lower return of threat expectancies. Thus, targeting avoidance instead of fear better reduced long-term avoidance and, for incentives, the return of fear. Especially, incentives could be a promising add-on to exposure.</p
Threat belief determines the degree of costly safety behavior:Assessing rule-based generalization of safety behavior with a dimensional measure of avoidance
Full text linkExcessive generalization of safety behavior to innocuous stimuli that resemble a feared stimulus is oftentimes pathological especially with inflicted impairments. Safety behavior is conventionally assessed dichotomously, requiring multiple presentations of each test stimulus for assessing the proportion of safety behavior executed. Thus, the generalization gradient confounds with ongoing extinction learning during non-reinforced test trials. The present study employed a recently developed dimensional measure of avoidance to examine the extent of safety behavior generalization. We found that a dimensional measure of avoidance was able to assess the generalization gradients of safety behavior even when each test stimulus was presented once, thus minimizing the effect of ongoing extinction learning. Of equal importance is whether higher-order cognitive processes shape generalization of safety behavior. We found a range of distinct generalization gradients in safety behavior, which were highly consistent with participants’ verbally reported relational rules. This rule-based generalization parallels to how clinically anxious individuals develop different threat beliefs after trauma exposure, and models how these distinct threat beliefs determine the extent of safety behavior engagement.</p
Reducing avoidance of learnt fear: Extinction of an imminent threat signal partly decreases costly avoidance to a distal threat signal
Full text linkIn the interplay of fear and avoidance, not only imminent threat signals that directly predict potential threat evoke avoidance, but also distal threat signals that predict these imminent threat signals. Avoidance of learnt fear refers to avoidance to a distal threat signal that prevents the occurrence of an imminent threat signal. In clinical anxiety, it is often pathological given its persistence in the absence of threat and the impairments it inflicts. The current study examined whether fear extinction to an imminent threat signal would effectively reduce avoidance of learnt fear in a sensory preconditioning procedure. Three neutral preconditioning stimuli (PSs), serving as distal threat or safety signals, were paired with three neutral to-be conditioned stimuli (CSs), serving as imminent threat or safety signals. After assessing baseline levels of costly avoidance to the PSs, two CSs were paired with threat. One of these CSs then ceased to predict threat during extinction training. In test, participants showed limited avoidance to the PS that signaled the extinguished CS, however, the level of avoidance was still stronger compared to a PS that signaled a safety CS. Results suggest that exposure to an imminent threat signal partly reduces avoidance to a distal threat
Costly avoidance triggered by categorical fear generalization
No full textFear generalization refers to the spread of acquired fear to novel stimuli that resemble the original fear-related stimulus. Preliminary evidence suggests that excessive fear generalization is a pathogenic feature of anxiety disorders, however, it remains unclear how fear generalization affects pathological avoidance. The current study thus aimed to examine the link between categorical fear generalization and costly avoidance. By combining a fear acquisition training phase and an avoidance test, the current findings showed that acquired fear spreads to novel stimuli that belonged to the same category of the original fear-related stimuli, but not to those that belonged to the fear-irrelevant categories. Importantly, participants avoided these fear-related novel stimuli despite costs. The current findings indicate that categorical fear generalization triggers costly avoidance. In terms of clinical implication, a decrease in costly avoidance aligned with a decrease in US expectancies. This emphasizes that behavioral approach may initiate extinction learning
The effect of typicality training on costly safety behavior generalization
Full text linkBackground and objectives: Typicality asymmetry in generalization refers to enhanced fear generalization when trained with typical compared to atypical exemplars. Typical exemplars are highly representative of their category, whereas atypical exemplars are less representative. Individual risk factors, such as trait anxiety, attenuate this effect, due to the high level of threat ambiguity of atypical exemplars. Although recent research provided evidence for generalization of safety behavior, it is unclear whether this generalization also follows typicality asymmetry. This study examined (1) whether participants exhibited typicality asymmetry in the generalization of safety behavior and (2) whether this effect would be attenuated by individual risk factors, such as intolerance of uncertainty and trait anxiety. Methods: Participants were trained with either typical (Typical group, n = 53) or atypical (Atypical group, n = 55) exemplars in a fear and avoidance conditioning procedure. Participants acquired differential conditioned fear and costly safety behavior to the threat- and safety-related exemplars. In a following Generalization Test, the degree of safety behavior to novel exemplars of the same categories was tested. Results: The Atypical group showed greater differential safety behavior responses compared to the Typical group. Higher trait anxiety was associated with lower differential safety behavior generalization, driven by an increase in generalized responding to novel safety-related exemplars. Limitations: This study used hypothetical cost instead of real cost. Conclusions: Training with atypical exemplars led to greater safety behavior generalization. Moreover, individuals with high trait anxiety show impaired safety behavior generalization.</p
Avoidance and its bi-directional relationship with conditioned fear:Mechanisms, moderators, and clinical implications
Full text linkFear motivates different types of defensive behaviors. These behaviors are, however, not mere byproducts of fear. In this review, we highlight a bi-directional relationship between conditioned fear and instrumental defensive behavior in humans. We discuss mechanisms involved in the link from fear to goal-directed avoidance (e.g., relief, generalization), that may become habitual. These defensive behaviors may in turn reduce, preserve, or amplify fear responding (e.g., protection-from-extinction, behavior-as-information). Multiple factors moderate the bi-directional relationship. Evidence for amplifying and dampening effects of inter-individual differences (e.g., trait anxiety, distress tolerance), intra-individual states (e.g., stress), and external factors (e.g., incentives for competing behavior) on goal-directed and/or habitual defensive behavior is reviewed. However, the exact mechanisms by which these factors moderate the bi-directional relationship are still largely unknown (e.g., modulating avoidance directly vs. indirectly via conditioned fear). Finally, we discuss major implications: First, understanding factors moderating the bi-directional relationship provides insights into risk and resilience factors for anxious psychopathology. Second, specific experimental models and clinical interventions can be mapped onto distinct defensive behaviors (e.g., goal-directed vs. habitual avoidance). More precise matching will help to develop nuanced models and interventions to reduce pathological behaviors and individualize treatments.</p
Reduction of costly safety behaviors after extinction with a generalization stimulus is determined by individual differences in generalization rules
Full text linkExposure-based treatment involves repeated presentation of feared stimuli or situations in the absence of perceived threat (i.e., extinction learning). However, the stimulus or situation of fear acquisition (CS+) is highly unlikely to be replicated and presented during treatment. Thereby, stimuli that resemble the CS+ (generalization stimuli; GSs) are typically presented. Preliminary evidence suggests that depending on how one generalizes fear (i.e., different generalization rules), presenting the same GS in extinction leads to differential effectiveness of extinction learning. The current study aimed to extend this finding to safety behaviors. After differential fear and avoidance conditioning, participants exhibited discrete generalization gradients that were consistent with their reported generalization rules (Similarity vs Linear). The Linear group showed stronger safety behaviors to a selected GS compared to the Similarity group, presumably due to higher threat expectancy. After extinction learning to this GS, the Linear group exhibited stronger reduction in safety behaviors generalization compared to the Similarity group. The results show that identifying distinct generalization rules allows one to predict expectancy violation to the extinction stimulus, in addition to corroborating the idea that strongly violating threat expectancy leads to better extinction learning and its generalization. With regard to clinical implications, identifying one's generalization rule (e.g., threat beliefs) help designing exposure sessions that evoke strong expectancy violation, enhancing the reduction in the generalization of maladaptive safety behaviors.</p
A network perspective on real-life threat, anxiety, and avoidance
Full text linkBackground: Anxiety, approach, and avoidance motivation crucially influence mental and physical health, especially when environments are stressful. The interplay between anxiety and behavioral motivation is modulated by multiple individual factors. This proof-of-concept study applies graph-theoretical network analysis to explore complex associations between self-reported trait anxiety, approach and avoidance motivation, situational anxiety, stress symptoms, perceived threat, perceived positive consequences of approach, and self-reported avoidance behavior in real-life threat situations. 'Methods: A total of 436 participants who were matched on age and gender (218 psychotherapy patients, 218 online-recruited nonpatients) completed an online survey assessing these factors in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Results and Discussion: The resulting cross-sectional psychological network revealed a complex pattern with multiple positive (e.g., between trait anxiety, avoidance motivation, and avoidance behavior) and negative associations (e.g., between approach and avoidance motivation). The patient and online subsample networks did not differ significantly, however, descriptive differences may inform future research.</p
- …
