ArticleScientific reports2023
Examining the impact of cue similarity and fear learning on perceptual tuning.
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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Increased generalisation in trait anxiety is driven by aversive value transfer.Communications psychology · 2026Article
- Article
- Consistency of perceptual response variability in size estimation and reproduction tasks.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- The representational instability in the generalization of fear learning.NPJ science of learning · 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
5 authors.
Funding
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
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.