2012Journal of PsychophysiologyRequires access

How Fast is Fear?

Ole Åsli, Magne Arve Flaten

Open publisher page 10 citations

Abstract

The minimum latency of potentiated startle after delay and trace fear conditioning was investigated. Delay conditioning is hypothesized to be mediated by automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is hypothesized to involve controlled cognitive processes. In a group receiving delay conditioning, a tone conditioned stimulus (CS) signaled an electric shock unconditioned stimulus (US) presented 1,000 ms after CS onset. In a group receiving trace conditioning, a 200 ms tone CS was followed by an 800 ms gap prior to US presentation. Two control groups received unpaired CS/US presentations. It was hypothesized that fear-potentiated startle should be observed at shorter time intervals after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the group receiving trace conditioning. The results showed increased startle at 100 and 150 ms after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the unpaired group. In the group receiving trace conditioning, increased startle was observed at 1,500 ms after CS onset compared to the unpaired group. This supports the idea that conditioned fear after delay conditioning may be due to automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is dependent on controlled processes.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The minimum latency of potentiated startle after delay and trace fear conditioning was investigated. Delay conditioning is hypothesized to be mediated by automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is hypothesized to involve controlled cognitive processes. In a group receiving delay conditioning, a tone conditioned stimulus (CS) signaled an electric shock unconditioned stimulus (US) presented 1,000 ms after CS onset. In a group receiving trace conditioning, a 200 ms tone CS was followed by an 800 ms gap prior to US presentation. Two control groups received unpaired CS/US presentations. It was hypothesized that fear-potentiated startle should be observed at shorter time intervals after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the group receiving trace conditioning. The results showed increased startle at 100 and 150 ms after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the unpaired group. In the group receiving trace conditioning, increased startle was observed at 1,500 ms after CS onset compared to the unpaired group. This supports the idea that conditioned fear after delay conditioning may be due to automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is dependent on controlled processes.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The minimum latency of potentiated startle after delay and trace fear conditioning was investigated. Delay conditioning is hypothesized to be mediated by automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is hypothesized to involve controlled cognitive processes. In a group receiving delay conditioning, a tone conditioned stimulus (CS) signaled an electric shock unconditioned stimulus (US) presented 1,000 ms after CS onset. In a group receiving trace conditioning, a 200 ms tone CS was followed by an 800 ms gap prior to US presentation. Two control groups received unpaired CS/US presentations. It was hypothesized that fear-potentiated startle should be observed at shorter time intervals after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the group receiving trace conditioning. The results showed increased startle at 100 and 150 ms after CS onset in the group receiving delay conditioning compared to the unpaired group. In the group receiving trace conditioning, increased startle was observed at 1,500 ms after CS onset compared to the unpaired group. This supports the idea that conditioned fear after delay conditioning may be due to automatic processes, whereas trace conditioning is dependent on controlled processes.

Key concepts: Conditioning, Classical conditioning, Fear conditioning, Psychology, Measures of conditioned emotional response, Unconditioned stimulus, Startle response, Startle reaction

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
How Fast is Fear? — Research Paper | ScholarLens