Cited by 104Memory and Neural MechanismsAction Observation and SynchronizationNeuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research

Neural Basis of Observational Fear Learning: A Potential Model of Affective Empathy

Open access
Keum, Sehoon, Shin, Hee-Sup·2019·Neuron

Abstract

Observational fear learning in rodents is a type of context-dependent fear conditioning in which an unconditioned stimulus (US) is provided vicariously by observing conspecific others receiving foot shocks. This suggests the involvement of affective empathy, with several recent studies showing many similarities between this behavior and human empathy. Neurobiologically, it is important to understand the neural mechanisms by which the vicarious US activates the fear circuit via the affective pain system, obviating the sensory pain pathway and eventually leading to fear memory formation. This paper reviews current studies on the neural mechanisms underlying observational fear learning and provides a perspective on future research on this subject.

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.neuron.2019.09.013

Cites

26 of 26 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?

  • Trait empathy while watching someone else go through a distressing scenario is a risk factor for fear-based pathology.

    “Trait empathy while watching someone else go through a distressing scenario is also a risk factor for fear-based pathology (e.g., Debiec et al., 2017; Keum & Shin, 2019; Olsson et al., 2016).”

    From I've Seen Enough: Measuring the Toll of Content Moderation on Mental Health (2025) · cites this paper as Keum & Shin, 2019

    The only matching text in our copy is the paper’s title, which links observational fear learning to a potential model of affective empathy. Searches for trait empathy, vulnerability to anxiety, and fear-based pathology found no passage addressing whether empathy while observing distress is a risk factor. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keum, S., & Shin, H.-S.
Affiliations
Institute for Basic Science (KR)
Corresponding author
  • Keum, Sehoon
  • Shin, Hee-Sup
Venue
Neuron
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-10
Volume
104
Issue
1
Pages
78-86
ISSN
0896-6273 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2979884473
Cited by
104
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neuron (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Korea Basic Science Institute (IBS-R001-D1)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neuroscience and Neuropharmacology Research
Keywords
affective empathy, fear circuit, rodent models, social learning
MeSH terms
Affect, Animals, Conditioning, Classical, Empathy, Fear, Gyrus Cinguli, Humans, Learning, Pain, Observation

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