Cited by 34

Less is more: Neural activity during very brief and clearly visible exposure to phobic stimuli

Siegel, Paul, Warren, Richard, Wang, Zhishun, Yang, Jie, Cohen, Don, Anderson, Jason F., Murray, Lilly, Peterson, Bradley S.·2017·Human Brain Mapping

Abstract

Research on automatic processes in fear has emphasized the provocation of fear responses rather than their attenuation. We have previously shown that the repeated presentation of feared images without conscious awareness via backward masking reduces avoidance of a live tarantula in spider‐phobic participants. Herein we investigated the neural basis for these adaptive effects of masked exposure. 21 spider‐phobic and 21 control participants, identified by a psychiatric interview, fear questionnaire, and approaching a live tarantula, viewed stimuli in each of three conditions: (1) very brief exposure (VBE) to masked images of spiders, severely limited awareness; (2) clearly visible exposure (CVE) to spiders, full awareness; and (3) masked images of flowers (control), severely limited awareness. Only VBE to masked spiders generated neural activity more strongly in phobic than in control participants, within subcortical fear, attention, higher‐order language, and vision systems. Moreover, VBE activated regions that support fear processing in phobic participants without causing them to experience fear consciously. Counter‐intuitively, CVE to the same spiders generated stronger neural activity in control rather than phobic participants within these and other systems. CVE deactivated regions supporting fear regulation and caused phobic participants to experience fear. CVE‐induced activations also correlated with measures of explicit fear ratings, whereas VBE‐induced activations correlated with measures of implicit fear (color‐naming interference of spider words). These multiple dissociations between the effects of VBE and CVE to spiders suggest that limiting awareness of exposure to phobic stimuli through visual masking paradoxically facilitates their processing, while simultaneously minimizing the experience of fear. Hum Brain Mapp 38:2466–2481, 2017 . © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/hbm.23533

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Evidence suggests that CBT or medication can modify the cascade of responses to real or perceived threat - CBT by altering behavioral avoidance and information processing related to threat detection and coping, and medication by altering neurotransmitter levels that affect the function and structure of brain circuits.

    “Evidence suggests that CBT or medication can modify the cascade of responses to real or perceived threat – CBT by altering behavioral avoidance and information processing related to threat detection and coping [56, 57], and medication by altering neurotransmitter levels that affect the function and structure of brain circuits [58–60].”

    From A Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trial (SMART) study of medication and CBT sequencing in the treatment of pediatric anxiety disorders (2021) · cites this paper as [56]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 32

  1. Alpers GW Gerdes AM Lagarie B Tabbert K Vaitl D Stark R 2009 Attention and amygdala activity: an fMRI study with spider pictures in spider phobia J Neur Trans 116 747 757 18726545
  2. Balderston NL Helstetter FJ 2010 Conditioning with masked stimuli affects the time course of skin conductance responses Behav Neurosci 4 478 489 PMC5275764 20695647
  3. Bar-Haim Y Lamy D Pergamin L Bakermans-Kranenburg MJ van IJzendoorn MH 2007 Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study Psychol Bull 133 1 24 17201568
  4. Carlsson K Petersson KM Lundqvist D Karlsson A Ingvar M Öhman A 2004 Fear and the amygdala: Manipulation of awareness generates differential cerebral responses to phobic and fear-relevant (but nonfeared) stimuli Emotion 4 340 353 15571433
  5. Etkin A Klemenhagen KC Dudman JT Rogan MT Hen R Kandel ER Hirsch J 2004 Individual differences in trait anxiety predict the response of the basolateral amygdala to unconsciously processed fearful faces Neuron 44 1043 1055 15603746
  6. Friston KJ Glaser DE Henson RA Kiebel S Phillips C Ashburner J 2002 Classical and bayesian inference in neuroimaging: Applications NeuroImage 16 484 512 12030833
  7. Friston KJ Penny W 2003 Posterior probability maps and SPMs NeuroImage 19 1240 1249 12880849
  8. Klein TA Neumann J Reuter M Hennig J von Cramon DY Ullsperger M 2007 Genetically determined differences in learning from errors Science 318 1642 1645 18063800
  9. Larson CL Schaefer HS Siegle GJ Jackson CA Anderle MJ Davidson RJ 2006 Fear is fast in phobic individuals: amygdala activation in response to fear-relevant stimuli Biol Psychiatry 60 410 17 16919528
  10. Linares IP Trzesniak C Chagas MN Hallak JC Nardi AE Crippa JS 2012 Neuroimaging in specific phobia disorder: A systematic review of the literature Rev Bras Psiquiatria 34 101 111 22392396
  11. Lipka J Miltner WR Straube T 2011 Vigilance for threat interacts with amygdala responses to subliminal threat cues in specific phobia Biol Psychiatry 70 472 478 21601831
  12. Mogg K Bradley BP 2002 Selective orienting of attention to masked threat faces in social anxiety Behav Res Ther 40 1403 1414 12457635
  13. Mogg K Philippot P Bradley BP 2004 Selective attention to angry faces in clinical social phobia J Abnorm Psychol 113 160 165 14992669
  14. Neumann J Lohmann G 2003 Bayesian second-level analysis of functional magnetic resonance images NeuroImage 20 1346 1355 14568503
  15. Öhman A Mineka S 2001 Fears, phobias, and preparedness: Toward an evolved module of fear and fear learning Psychol Rev 108 483 522 11488376
  16. Öhman A Soares J 1998 Emotional conditioning to masked stimuli: Expectancies for aversive outcomes following nonrecognized fear-relevant stimuli J Exp Psychol: Gen 127 69 82 9503652
  17. Öhman A Soares J 1993 On the automatic nature of phobic fear: Conditioned electrodermal responses to masked fear-relevant stimuli J Abnorm Psychol 102 121 132 8436688
  18. Raichle ME MacLeod AM Snyder AZ Powers WJ Gusnard DA Shulman GL 2001 A default mode of brain function Proc Natl Acad Sci 98 676 682 11209064 PMC14647
  19. Schweckendiek J Klucken T Merz CJ Tabbert K Walter B Ambach W Vaitl D Stark R 2011 Weaving the (neuronal) web: fear learning in spider phobia NeuroImage 54 681 688 20673801
  20. Siegel P Anderson JF Han E 2011 Very brief exposure II: The effects of unreportable stimuli on phobic behavior Consc Cognition 20 181 190 21334225
  21. Siegel P Gallagher KA 2015 Delaying in vivo exposure to a tarantula with very brief exposure to phobic stimuli J Behav Ther Exper Psychiatry 46 182 188 25460265
  22. Siegel P Warren R 2013 The effect of very brief exposure on the subjective experience of fear induced by in vivo exposure Cog Emotion 27 1013 1022 23438484
  23. Siegel P Warren R 2013 Less is still more: Maintenance of the very brief exposure effect one year later Emotion 13 338 344 23527506
  24. Siegel P Weinberger J 2009 Very brief exposure: The effects of unreportable stimuli on fearful behavior Consc Cognition 18 939 951 19733094
  25. Siegel P Weinberger J 2012 Less is more: The effects of very brief versus clearly visible exposure on spider phobia Emotion 12 394 402 22468620
  26. Straube T Mentzel HJ Miltner WH 2006 Neural mechanisms of automatic and direct processing of phobogenic stimuli in specific phobia Biol Psychiatry 59 162 70 16139812
  27. Weinberger J Siegel P Siefert C Drawl J 2011 What You Can’t See Can Help You Consc Cognition 20 173 180 21300558
  28. Whalen PJ Rauch SL Etcoff NL McInerney SC Lee MB Jenike MA 1998 Masked presentations of emotional facial expressions modulate amygdala activity without explicit knowledge J Neurosci 18 411 418 9412517 PMC6793390
  29. Whalen PJ Kagan J Cook RG Davis FC Kim H Polis S McLaren DG Somerville LH McLean AA Maxwell JS Johnstone T 2004 Human amygdala responsivity to masked fearful eye whites Science 306 2061 15604401
  30. Wiens S 2006 Current concerns in visual masking Emotion 6 675 680 17144759
  31. Williams JMG Watts FN MacLeod C Mathews A 1997 Cognitive psychology and emotional disorders 2 Chichester, England John Wiley & Sons, Inc
  32. Williams JG Matthews A Macleod C 1996 The emotional stroop task and psychopathology Psychol Bull 120 3 24 8711015

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Siegel, P., Warren, R., Wang, Z., Yang, J., Cohen, D., Anderson, J. F., Murray, L., & Peterson, B. S.
Venue
Human Brain Mapping
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-02-06
Volume
38
Issue
5
Pages
2466-2481
ISSN
  • 1065-9471
  • 1097-0193
Cited by
34
References
15
Language
en
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (7R21MH101564‐02)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review