Cited by 110Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesPosttraumatic Stress Disorder Research

Stressor controllability modulates fear extinction in humans

Open access
Hartley, Catherine A., Gorun, Alyson, Reddan, Marianne C., Ramirez, Franchesca, Phelps, Elizabeth A.·2014·Neurobiology of Learning and Memory

Abstract

Traumatic events are proposed to play a role in the development of anxiety disorders, however not all individuals exposed to extreme stress experience a pathological increase in fear. Recent studies in animal models suggest that the degree to which one is able to control an aversive experience is a critical factor determining its behavioral consequences. In this study, we examined whether stressor controllability modulates subsequent conditioned fear expression in humans. Participants were randomly assigned to an escapable stressor condition, a yoked inescapable stressor condition, or a control condition involving no stress exposure. One week later, all participants underwent fear conditioning, fear extinction, and a test of extinction retrieval the following day. Participants exposed to inescapable stress showed impaired fear extinction learning and increased fear expression the following day. In contrast, escapable stress improved fear extinction and prevented the spontaneous recovery of fear. Consistent with the bidirectional controllability effects previously reported in animal models, these results suggest that one's degree of control over aversive experiences may be an important factor influencing the development of psychological resilience or vulnerability in humans.

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.nlm.2013.12.003

Cites

39 of 39 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?

  • To persistently diminish threat conditioned responses in humans, avoidance actions need to be learned through trial and error and there needs to be a subjective sense of control over the unconditioned stimulus during learning.

    “However, in order to persistently diminish threat conditioned responses in humans, avoidance actions need to be learned through trial and error and there needs to be a subjective sense of control over the unconditioned stimulus during learning [115].”

    From Prefrontal cortex, amygdala, and threat processing: implications for PTSD (2022) · cites this paper as [115]

    The Results (§3.3) report that participants who had controlled shocks showed reduced conditioned fear responses during extinction, with the reduction retained the next day. Results (§3.4) also link greater perceived control to lower fear expression. But the paper does not establish that trial-and-error avoidance learning and a subjective sense of control are both necessary: objective avoidance performance was not significantly related to fear responses at retrieval, and perceived control was a predictor rather than a demonstrated requirement. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A small experimental literature on avoidance in humans and a large clinical literature have yielded conflicting findings regarding whether avoidance attenuates threat responses or patients' fear.

    “A small experimental literature on avoidance in humans and a large clinical literature have yielded conflicting findings regarding whether avoidance attenuates threat responses or patients' fear.”

    From Active avoidance: Neural mechanisms and attenuation of pavlovian conditioned responding (2017) · cites this paper as Hartley et al., 2014

    The Discussion (page unavailable) reports that escapable stress diminished conditioned fear expression in the human experiment. It does not describe a large clinical literature yielding conflicting findings about whether avoidance reduces patients’ fear; instead, it says active-coping techniques have received relatively little clinical attention. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In humans, avoidance learning and history with escapable shock can persistently reduce conditioned threat actions as measured with SCR, even when no avoidance action is available.

    “In humans, there is evidence that both avoidance learning and history with escapable shock can persistently reduce conditioned threat actions as measured with SCR, even when no avoidance action is available [114, 115].”
  • Some studies in humans have found that learning to prevent shocks eliminated spontaneous recovery.

    “Consistent with the results of experiments in rodents discussed above, some studies in humans (Hartley et al., 2014; C. A. Hartley, C. A. Coelho, E. A. Boeke, F. Ramirez, and E. A. Phelps, unpublished observations) have found that learning to prevent shocks eliminated spontaneous recovery.”
  • Translation of rodent research on instrumental control over threat to humans has been limited.

    “Translation of this research to humans has been limited (Collins et al., 2014; Hartley et al., 2014).”

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: 1

  1. Joffe J Rawson R Mulick J 1973 Control of their environmentreduces emotionality in rats Science 180 1383 84 4736265

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hartley, C. A., Gorun, A., Reddan, M. C., Ramirez, F., & Phelps, E. A.
Affiliations
  • Weill Cornell Medicine (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (US)
  • Nathan Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research (US)
Corresponding author
Phelps, Elizabeth A.
Venue
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-09
Volume
113
Pages
149-156
ISSN
1074-7427 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2004180496
Cited by
110
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 4
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Neurobiology of Learning and Memory (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard (DASH) (Harvard University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH080756, R01MH097085, MH 080756, MH062104, R01MH062104)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Research
Keywords
stressor controllability, fear extinction, inescapable stress, fear conditioning, anxiety disorders, psychological resilience, trauma exposure, extinction retrieval
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Avoidance Learning, Conditioning, Classical, Extinction, Psychological, Fear, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Random Allocation, Stress, Psychological, Young Adult

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