Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35616523›Full record

ArticleeLife2022

Conditional and unconditional components of aversively motivated freezing, flight and darting in mice.

Jeremy M Trott, Ann N Hoffman, Irina Zhuravka, Michael S Fanselow

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eLife, 2022. 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
8.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 76 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Fine mapping of PTSD GWAS reveals a role for amygdalabioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jeremy M TrottStaglin Center for Brain and Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-7875-3446
Ann N HoffmanStaglin Center for Brain and Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States.
Irina ZhuravkaStaglin Center for Brain and Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States.
Michael S FanselowStaglin Center for Brain and Behavioral Health, Department of Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Biobehavioral Sciences, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-3850-5966
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
UCLA Training Program in Translational Neuroscience of Drug Abuse (TNDA)T32DA024635 · NIDA · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LOS ANGELES · PI LARA A. RAY, Kate M Wassum · 2008 to 2026
$6.2M
NIDA NIH HHS T32 DA024635NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH062122
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fear conditioning is one of the most frequently used laboratory procedures for modeling learning and memory generally, and anxiety disorders in particular. The conditional response (CR) used in the majority of fear conditioning studies in rodents is freezing. Recently, it has been reported that under certain conditions, running, jumping, or darting replaces freezing as the dominant CR. These findings raise both a critical methodological problem and an important theoretical issue. If only freezing is measured but rodents express their learning with a different response, then significant instances of learning, memory, or fear may be missed. In terms of theory, whatever conditions lead to these different behaviors may be a key to how animals transition between different defensive responses and different emotional states. In mice, we replicated these past results but along with several novel control conditions. Contrary to the prior conclusions, running and darting were primarily a result of nonassociative processes and were actually suppressed by associative learning. Darting and flight were taken to be analogous to nonassociative startle or alpha responses that are potentiated by fear. Additionally, associative processes had some impact on the topography of flight behavior. On the other hand, freezing was the purest reflection of associative learning. We also uncovered a rule that describes when these movements replace freezing: when afraid, freeze until there is a sudden novel change in stimulation, then burst into vigorous flight attempts. This rule may also govern the change from fear to panic.

Indexed as

Conditioning, ClassicalFearAnimalsFreezingLearningMicedartingdefensive behaviorfear conditioninglearningmemorymouseneurosciencePredatory Imminence

Identifiers

PMID35616523
PMCPMC9173745
OpenAlexW4281562841

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.