ArticleLearning & behavior2023
Calibrating your own fears: Feasibility of a remote fear conditioning paradigm with semi-subjective stimulus calibration and differences in fear learning.
Article in Learning & behavior, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Contingency awareness shapes neural responses in fear conditioning.Neuroscience of consciousness · 2026Article
- Far from the threatening crowd: Generalisation of conditioned threat expectancy and fear in COVID-19 lockdown.Learning & behavior · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fear conditioning studies have occurred mostly in the laboratory, but recently researchers have started to adapt fear conditioning procedures for remote application. Standardization of aversive stimulus material not causing unnecessarily strong discomfort remains an issue especially relevant to research without experimental supervision. The present study introduces a novel semi-subjective method to calibrate aversive sounds in a remotely conducted fear conditioning paradigm. To demonstrate feasibility and proof of concept, 165 participants completed the paradigm, calibrating the loudness of an aversive sound without the guidance of an experimental instructor. This study also aimed to replicate existing findings of participant groups that differed in their early CS-UCS contingency awareness. Participants were classified as Accurate (UCS more likely after the CS+ than CS-), Poor (UCS more likely after the CS- than CS+, or UCS unlikely after either CS), and Threat Biased (UCS equally likely after the CS+ and CS-). Results indicated both the feasibility and efficacy of the paradigm, with participants showing typical patterns of fear learning. Threat Biased participants showed significantly higher uncertainty towards safety signals. There were no differences between the groups in terms of personality traits, thus questioning whether these attributes mediate differences in fear learning and the emergence of anxiety disorders. Using semi-subjective sound calibration appears to be functional, and future studies may consider implementing the new method when remotely administering fear conditioning paradigms.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.