Cited by 46Memory and Neural MechanismsAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMemory Processes and Influences

The effects of cued UCS rehearsal on the retention of differential ‘fear’ conditioning: An experimental analogue of the ‘worry’ process

Jones, Tanya, Davey, Graham C.L.·1990·Behaviour Research and Therapy

Abstract

This study describes a human electrodermal conditioning experiment in which subjects were asked to mentally rehearse the UCS in a period following initial fear conditioning and prior to a test period involving nonreinforced presentations of the CS. Subjects who were asked to rehearse the UCS retained a differential fear CR during subsequent unreinforced presentations of the CS, but control subjects who were asked to rehearse either a nonaversive event or an aversive event unrelated to the UCS failed to retain the differential CR they had acquired during conditioning. These results suggest that rehearsal of the UCS during periods when CS and UCS are absent can aid the persistence of a fear CR in the absence of further pairings of the CS and UCS. It is argued that these effects can be explained in terms of the effect of UCS rehearsal on the strength and evaluation of the UCS representation. It is also suggested that cued UCS rehearsal might provide a useful procedure for understanding clinical incubation effects and for understanding how the 'worry' process contributes to the maintenance and incubation of fear.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0005-7967(90)90028-h

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Rehearsing an aversive unconditioned stimulus in thought keeps a conditioned fear response alive over repeated nonreinforced presentations of a neutral conditioned stimulus.

    “Moreover, in a series of studies, Jones, Davey, and colleagues have shown that cognitive rehearsal of an aversive unconditioned stimulus (which is similar to repetitive negative thought found in worry) maintains a conditioned fear response over successive nonreinforced presentations of a neutral conditioned stimulus (Davey & Matchett, 1994; Jones & Davey, 1990).”

No citation lists for this paper

No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.

References 19 · Cited by 46

Authors
Jones, T., & Davey, G. C. L.
Affiliations
  • University of London (GB)
  • City, University of London (GB)
Corresponding author
Davey, Graham C.L.
Venue
Behaviour Research and Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1990
Volume
28
Issue
2
Pages
159-164
ISSN
0005-7967 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2083483106
Cited by
46
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 3 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour Research and Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
Keywords
fear conditioning, mental practice, worry, electrodermal activity, differential conditioning
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Anxiety, Arousal, Conditioning, Classical, Cues, Fear, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Male, Memory, Retention, Psychology, Thinking

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