Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30984805›Full record

ArticleCurrent opinion in behavioral sciences2019

Avoidance Problems Reconsidered.

Christopher K Cain

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current opinion in behavioral sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

48 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Retrosplenial cortex and aversive conditioning.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Stress, associative learning, and decision-making.Neurobiology of learning and memory · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Christopher K CainNYU School of Medicine, Dept. of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 1 Park Avenue, 8 Floor, New York, NY 10016.

Funding

Brain Circuits of Outcome-dependent vs. Habitual AvoidanceR01MH114931 · NIMH · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE · PI CAIN, CHRISTOPHER KENNETH · 2017 to 2021
$1.9M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH114931
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Active avoidance is the prototypical paradigm for studying aversively-motivated instrumental behavior. However, avoidance research stalled amid heated theoretical debates and the hypothesis that active avoidance is essentially Pavlovian flight. Here I reconsider key "avoidance problems" and review neurobehavioral data collected with modern tools. Although the picture remains incomplete, these studies strongly suggest that avoidance has an instrumental component and is mediated by brain circuits that resemble appetitive instrumental actions more than Pavlovian fear reactions. Rapid progress may be possible if investigators consider important factors like safety signals, response-competition, goal-directed vs. habitual control and threat imminence in avoidance study design. Since avoidance responses likely contribute to active coping, this research has important implications for understanding human resilience and disorders of control.

Identifiers

PMID30984805
PMCPMC6456067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.