ArticleSocial cognitive and affective neuroscience2025
Generalized expectancy of threat in threatening compared to safe contexts.
Article in Social cognitive and affective neuroscience, 2025. 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.
- The impact of inherently aversive contexts on visuocortical processing of generalized threat.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2025Article
- The modulatory effect of evaluative valence on fear generalization in social anxiety: an SSVEP study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Fear of threatening contexts often generalizes to similar safe contexts, but few studies have investigated how contextual information influences cue generalization. In this study, we explored whether fear responses to cues would generalize more broadly in a threatening compared to a safe context. Forty-seven participants underwent a differential cue-in-context conditioning protocol followed by a generalization test, while we recorded psychophysiological and subjective responses. Two faces appeared on a computer screen in two contexts. One face (CS+) in the threat context (CTX+) was followed by a female scream 80% of the time, while another face (CS-) was not reinforced. No faces were reinforced in the safe context (CTX-). In the generalization test, the CSs and four morphs varying in similarity with the CS+ were presented in both contexts. During acquisition, conditioned responses to the cues were registered for all measures and the differential responding between CS+ and CS- was higher in CTX+ for US-expectancy ratings and skin conductance responses, but the affective ratings and steady-state visual evoked potentials were not context-sensitive. During test, adaptive generalized responses were evident for all measures. Despite increased US-expectancy ratings in CTX+, participants exhibited similar cue generalization in both contexts, suggesting that threatening contexts do not influence cue generalization.
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.