ArticleLearning & behavior2026
Unconditional stimulus deflation is stimulus specific.
Article in Learning & behavior, 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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Previous work has demonstrated that repeated presentations of a conditional stimulus (CS) with a weak shock following training with a strong shock can reduce later conditional responding to that CS. While this procedure shares characteristics with extinction, several converging lines of evidence suggest that weak shock exposure, with steps to minimize prediction error between acquisition and the weak shock phase, will have an advantage over extinction to persistently reduce fear behaviors. A similar experiment by Rescorla demonstrated that unconditional stimulus (US) habituation (repeated exposure to the US alone) reduced responding to a CS that previously predicted that US. Here, we apply this same logic to our weak shock procedure to determine if weak shock presentations in the absence of the CS could reduce responding to subsequent presentations of the same CS. In Experiment 1, using a within-subject procedure, we found that the weak shock-driven reductions in CS-elicited behavior did not transfer to a different CS that was not paired with a weak shock. In Experiments 2 and 3, we demonstrated that weak shock presentations in the absence of a CS (in either a novel context or the acquisition context, respectively) did not attenuate later CS-elicited freezing. Together, these results suggest that, like extinction, weak shock presentations reduce fear behavior in a stimulus-specific manner.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42154199What 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.