The DOI matches its Crossref record; 93 of the 95 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
What's wrong with fear conditioning?
Open accessAbstract
Fear conditioning is one of the prime paradigms of behavioural neuroscience and a source of tremendous insight in the fundamentals of learning and memory and the psychology and neurobiology of emotion. It is also widely regarded as a model for the pathogenesis of anxiety disorders in a diathesis-stress model of psychopathology. Starting from the apparent paradox between the adaptive nature of fear conditioning and the dysfunctional nature of pathological anxiety, we present a critique of the human fear conditioning paradigm as an experimental model for psychopathology. We discuss the potential benefits of expanding the human fear conditioning paradigm by (1) including action tendencies as an important index of fear and (2) paying more attention to "weak" (i.e., ambiguous) rather than "strong" fear learning situations (Lissek et al., 2006), such as contained in selective learning procedures. We present preliminary data that illustrate these ideas and discuss the importance of response systems divergence in understanding individual differences in vulnerability for the development of pathological anxiety.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“There is also relatively little evidence that known vulnerability factors for PTSD are related to dysfunctional fear-learning patterns in non-clinical populations [35].”
From Memory and Forgetting (2018) · cites this paper as [35]
Citations
Cites
(1970) · Cited by 24,983
LeDoux, J. E. (2000) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.23.1.155 · Cited by 8,444
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders ( DSM ‐ IV ‐ TR )
Segal, D. L. (2010) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9780470479216.corpsy0271 · Cited by 4,687
Psychotherapy by reciprocal inhibition
Wolpe, J. (1968) · Pavlovian Journal of Biological Science · doi:10.1007/bf03000093 · Cited by 3,406
Handbook of emotion regulation
Gross, J. (2014) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.52-1127 · Cited by 3,283
Psychotherapy by Reciprocal Inhibition
Masserman, J. H. (1958) · Archives of Neurology And Psychiatry · doi:10.1001/archneurpsyc.1958.02340090135025 · Cited by 3,087
The emotion probe: Studies of motivation and attention.
Lang, P. J. (1995) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037//0003-066x.50.5.372 · Cited by 2,876
The practice of behavior therapy
Wolpe, J. (1969) · Cited by 2,343
Emotion, attention, and the startle reflex
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.3.377 · Cited by 2,205
Mauss, I. B., & Robinson, M. D. (2009) · Cognition and Emotion · doi:10.1080/02699930802204677 · Cited by 2,078
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Maximizing exposure therapy: An inhibitory learning approach
Craske, M. G., Treanor, M., Conway, C. C., Zbozinek, T., & Vervliet, B. (2014) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2014.04.006 · Cited by 2,339
Lonsdorf, T. B., Menz, M. M., Andreatta, M., Fullana, M. A., Golkar, A., Haaker, J., Heitland, I., Hermann, A., Kuhn, M., Kruse, O., et al. (2017) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2017.02.026 · Cited by 837
Hannibal, K. E., & Bishop, M. D. (2014) · Physical Therapy · doi:10.2522/ptj.20130597 · Cited by 729
Fear Generalization in Humans: Systematic Review and Implications for Anxiety Disorder Research
Dymond, S., Dunsmoor, J. E., Vervliet, B., Roche, B. T., & Hermans, D. (2014) · Behavior Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.beth.2014.10.001 · Cited by 542
Avoidance learning: a review of theoretical models and recent developments
Krypotos, A. (2015) · Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00189 · Cited by 402
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Beckers, T., Krypotos, A.-M., Boddez, Y., Effting, M., & Kindt, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Amsterdam (NL)
- KU Leuven (BE)
- Corresponding author
- Beckers, Tom
- Venue
- Biological Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-01
- Volume
- 92
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 90-96
- ISSN
- 0301-0511 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2149193362
- Cited by
- 272
- References
- 95
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 25 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 25 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 21 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 12
- FWCI
- 8.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Biological Psychology (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (publishedVersion)
- Lirias (KU Leuven) (submittedVersion)
- Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
- Alexander S. Onassis Public Benefit Foundation
- 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 › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- fear conditioning, anxiety disorders, diathesis-stress model, action tendencies, learning and memory
- MeSH terms
- Adaptation, Psychological, Anxiety Disorders, Catechol O-Methyltransferase, Conditioning, Psychological, Fear, Humans, Research
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
