ArticleNature communications2026
Predicting individual differences of fear and cognitive learning and extinction.
Article in Nature communications, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
27 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The ability to acquire new information and to modify previously learned knowledge are critical in an ever-changing world. However, the efficacy of learning is notably variable among individuals, with extinction learning being the epitome of such variability. Abundant studies have identified a core network of brain regions including the amygdala, hippocampus, dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (ACC), ventromedial prefrontal cortex (PFC) and, more recently, the cerebellum, as key players in learning and extinction. Yet, the precise interactions within this network and their relationship to individual learning abilities and extinction have remained largely unexplored. In the present study, we examined how functional (FC), effective (EC), and structural (SC) connectivity patterns in the core learning network allow the prediction of individual differences in the efficacy of learning, extinction, and renewal. Analysing a large dataset of over 500 participants across a multitude of paradigms, our results revealed that FC predicted better acquisition, with a central role of ACC and hippocampus, whereas SC, involving ACC and amygdala, predicted higher levels of extinction learning. EC results suggested a predominantly inhibitory coupling among core learning network nodes, with paradigm-specific EC connectivity patterns predicting learning. Our predictions not only generalised between fear and cognitive predictive learning paradigms but were also successful in predicting learning from task-related FC and simulated data. Together, these results describe the multimodal neural determinants of learning, extinction, and renewal, and may inform individualised interventions for affective disorders based on neural connectivity patterns.
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.