Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31254627›Full record

ArticleBehavioural processes2019

Timing and the transition between modes in the defensive behavior system.

Michael S Fanselow, Ann N Hoffman, Irina Zhuravka

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Behavioural processes, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed
9.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 60 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Retrosplenial cortex and aversive conditioning.Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience · 2024
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Piecing together the puzzle of emotional consciousness.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Michael S FanselowStaglin Center for Brain & Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, 90405, United States. Electronic address: fanselow@ucla.edu.
Ann N HoffmanStaglin Center for Brain & Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, 90405, United States.
Irina ZhuravkaStaglin Center for Brain & Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles, CA, 90405, United States.
University of California, Los Angeles · US

Funding

Contextual Fear Differentiation, Sex Differences and AcetylcholineR01MH062122 · NIMH · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI FANSELOW, MICHAEL S · 2001 to 2021
$7.3M
NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH062122
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Antipredator defense is organized in a way that mirrors Timberlake's feeding behavior system because the goal of defense is to thwart predatory behavior. Each predatory mode has a corresponding antipredator mode. Like appetitive behavior systems, the defensive behavior system is organized around distinct modes along a spatiotemporal continuum we call the predatory imminence continuum. Behavior systems theory directs investigation toward the factors that lead to transitions between modes. In the feeding and sex systems the time between Conditional Stimulus (CS) and Unconditional Stimulus (US; e.g., CS-US interval or CS duration) is an important factor. Short CSs elicit conditional responses (CR) characteristic of more terminal modes and long CSs provoke CRs belonging to initial modes. Therefore, we asked if short CSs (10 s) would provoke CRs like the vigorous activity bursts and escape-like responses characteristic of the terminal mode of the predatory imminence continuum (Circa-Strike Behavior). Also, via analogy to appetitive systems, long CSs (3 min) were predicted to favor the intermediate mode, post-encounter behavior, which is characterized by freezing. Instead we found that both CSs produced freezing but not activity burst CRs and that freezing was actually greater with the short CS. We suggest that this difference between behavior systems flows from selection pressure that favors moving toward terminal modes in appetitive systems but away from terminal modes in the antipredator system. In addition, since appetitive reinforcers are more likely to be repeatedly experienced than predators, the learning of timing may be less relevant to defense. We also found that shock produced activity bursts and argue that when you are in the post-encounter mode (freezing) a sudden change in stimulation causes an immediate transition to circa-strike (terminal) behavior.

Indexed as

AnimalsBehavior, AnimalConditioning, ClassicalFearFemaleMaleRatsRats, Long-EvansCS durationCS-US intervalEscapeFearFlightFreezingPanic

Identifiers

PMID31254627
PMCPMC7108871
OpenAlexW2953678504

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.