Cited by 524Memory and Neural MechanismsPrimate Behavior and EcologyPhilosophy and Theoretical Science

The Biology of Fear

Open access
Adolphs, Ralph·2013·Current Biology

Abstract

Each of us has felt afraid, and we can all recognize fear in many animal species. Yet there is no consensus in the scientific study of fear. Some argue that 'fear' is a psychological construct rather than something discoverable through scientific investigation. Others argue that the term 'fear' cannot properly be applied to animals because we cannot know whether they feel afraid. Studies in rodents show that there are highly specific brain circuits for fear, whereas findings from human neuroimaging seem to make the opposite claim. Here, I review the field and urge three approaches that could reconcile the debates. For one, we need a broadly comparative approach that would identify core components of fear conserved across phylogeny. This also pushes us towards the second point of emphasis: an ecological theory of fear that is essentially functional. Finally, we should aim even to incorporate the conscious experience of being afraid, reinvigorating the study of feelings across species.

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 · 10.1016/j.cub.2012.11.055

Cites

158 of 158 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?

  • It is an error to claim that studies of the human brain using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) yield different results than studies of non-human animal brains with lesions or optogenetics.

    “When viewed in this light, it is an error to claim that studies of the human brain using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) yield different results than studies of non-human animal brains with lesions or optogenetics (e.g. Adolphs, 2013).”

    From The theory of constructed emotion: an active inference account of interoception and categorization (2016) · cites this paper as Adolphs, 2013

    The Abstract says rodent studies show highly specific fear circuits, whereas human neuroimaging findings seem to make the opposite claim. The Conclusions and Open Challenges suggest that fMRI may miss neuron-level distinctions, offering a possible explanation for the apparent difference—not saying it is an error to report different results. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Damage to the amygdala disrupts the ability of animals and people to respond to threats behaviorally and physiologically.

    “A great deal of research has shown that damage to the amygdala disrupts the ability of animals and people to respond to threats behaviorally and physiologically (13-15, 17, 19, 20).”

    From A higher-order theory of emotional consciousness (2017) · cites this paper as [17]

    In “Fear and the Amygdala” (page not available), the paper describes the amygdala as regulating fear responses, including freezing and cortical arousal, and says its role in fear processing is conserved across humans and other animals. It also implicates the human amygdala in the expression of fear. These passages support its role in behavioral and physiological responses, but do not establish that damage disrupts both kinds of threat response in animals and people. (LLM, conf=0.79)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The functional activity of the central autonomic-interoceptive brain system may have direct relevance to the conscious experience of fear and anxiety, in addition to non-conscious aspects of fear processing.

    “This finding, taken with other recent evidence, endorses an emerging view that the functional activity of this brain system may have direct relevance to the conscious experience of fear and anxiety, in addition to non-conscious aspects of fear processing, 39 a view which is compatible with current appraisal theories.35”
  • The idea of fear as primarily relating to consciously felt experience appears to resonate with the overall findings of fMRI-conditioning studies, which consistently implicate a neural signature with direct hypothesized relevance to the conscious experience of emotions.

    “Although the boundary between these processes and their neuroanatomical representation remains a topic of debate, the idea of 'fear' as primarily relating to consciously felt experience appears to resonate with the overall findings of fMRI-conditioning studies, which consistently implicate a neural signature with direct hypothesized relevance to the conscious experience of emotions.30,31,39”

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: 3

  1. [12]Panksepp J Affective Neuroscience 1998 New York Oxford University Press
  2. [14]Barrett LF Mesquita B Ochsner KN Gross JJ The experience of emotion Ann. Rev. Psychol 2007 58 373 403 17002554 PMC1934613
  3. [126]Lindquist KA Wager TD Kober H Bliss-Moreau E Barrett LF The brain basis of emotion: a meta-analytic review Behav. Brain Sci 2012 35 121 143 22617651 PMC4329228

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adolphs, R.
Affiliations
California Institute of Technology (US)
Corresponding author
Adolphs, Ralph
Venue
Current Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-01
Volume
23
Issue
2
Pages
R79-R93
ISSN
0960-9822 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2068200449
Cited by
524
References
158
Citations by year
2026: 31 · 2025: 63 · 2024: 63 · 2023: 58 · 2022: 48 · 2021: 56 · 2020: 44 · 2019: 38 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 29 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 20 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 5
FWCI
1.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Current Biology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • CaltechAUTHORS (California Institute of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Primate Behavior and Ecology
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Philosophy and Theoretical Science
Keywords
fear, animal emotions, fear circuit, rodent brain, human neuroimaging, phylogenetic conservation, subjective experience
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Biological, Amygdala, Animals, Behavior, Animal, Behavioral Sciences, Consciousness, Fear, Humans

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