ArticleBMC psychology2024
Secure attachment priming inhibits the generalization of conditioned fear.
Article in BMC psychology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Breath-Counting Task Enhances the Sensitivity of Fear Acquisition.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
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
backgroundFear overgeneralization constitutes a susceptibility factor contributing to the development and maintenance of anxiety spectrum disorders. Extant research has demonstrated that exposure to positive and supportive social relationships attenuates fear acquisition and promotes the extinction of conditioned fear responses. However, the literature lacks investigation into the effect of secure attachment priming on inhibiting the generalization of conditioned fear.
methodsIn this study, college students were recruited via online platforms to voluntarily engage in the experimental procedures, resulting in 57 subjects whose data were deemed suitable for analysis. The experimental protocol consisted of four consecutive phases: pre-acquisition, acquisition, priming, and generalization. The priming phase consisted of two experimental conditions: secure attachment priming (experimental group) and positive emotion priming (control group). This study adopted the perceptual discrimination fear conditioning paradigm, employing subjective expectancy of shock ratings and skin conductance responses as primary assessment indices. Individual difference variables were measured using corresponding psychological measurement scales.
resultsIn terms of generalization degree, a notable divergence surfaced in the skin conductance responses across various generalization materials between the secure attachment priming group and the control group. Similarly, during generalization extinction, a significant disparity emerged in the skin conductance responses across different generalization phases between the secure attachment priming group and the control group. In addition, individual differences analyses revealed that the inhibitory effect of secure attachment priming on fear generalization was not affected by intolerance of uncertainty and attachment orientations. Conversely, slope analyses confirmed that as intolerance of uncertainty increased, the inhibitory effect of positive emotion priming on fear generalization was attenuated.
conclusionThe findings suggest that activating participants' representations of secure attachment via imagination effectively attenuates the generalization of perceptual fear at the physiological level. The inhibitory effect of secure attachment priming appears to be distinct from positive emotional modulation and remains unaffected by individual trait attachment styles. These results offer novel insights and avenues for the prevention and clinical intervention of anxiety spectrum disorders.
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.