Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37563349›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2023

Examining the impact of cue similarity and fear learning on perceptual tuning.

Jonas Zaman, Kenny Yu, Marta Andreatta, Matthias J Wieser, Yannik Stegmann

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing 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

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

5 authors.

Jonas ZamanCentre for the Psychology of Learning and Experimental Psychopathology, KU Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, Box 3726, 3000, Leuven, Belgium. jonas.zaman@kuleuven.be.
Kenny YuQuantitative Psychology and Individual Differences, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, KU Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, Box 3726, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.
Marta AndreattaDepartment of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Post Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Matthias J WieserDepartment of Psychology, Education and Child Studies, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Post Box 1738, 3000 DR, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Yannik StegmannDepartment of Psychology (Experimental Clinical Psychology), University of Würzburg, 97070, Würzburg, Germany.

Funding

Efic-Grünenthal grant 358254826Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek 12P8619NFonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek G079520N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Past research on the effects of associative aversive learning on discrimination acuity has shown mixed results, including increases, decreases, and no changes in discrimination ability. An animal study found that the type of learning experience determined the direction and extent of learning-induced changes. The current preregistered web-based study aimed to translate these findings to humans. Experiment 1 (N = 245) compared changes in stimulus discrimination between simple learning (only one oriented grating cue), coarse differential conditioning (physically distinct cues), and fine differential conditioning (physically similar cues) as well as to their three respective control groups. The discrimination task consisted of a two-alternative-forced-choice task with oriented grating stimuli. During learning, a specific orientation was paired with unpleasant pictures. Our analysis using generative modeling demonstrated weak to moderate evidence that aversive learning did not alter discrimination acuity in any of the groups. In a follow-up experiment (N = 121), we replicated these findings despite successful learning trajectories in all three groups and a more detailed assessment of discrimination acuity. Contrary to prior assumptions, our findings indicate that aversive learning does not enhance perceptual discrimination, and the presence of additional safety cues does not appear to moderate this effect.

Indexed as

CuesFearAnimalsAvoidance LearningConditioning, ClassicalDiscrimination LearningHumans

Identifiers

PMID37563349
PMCPMC10415342

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.