Cited by 37Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMemory and Neural MechanismsPsychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments

Anxiogenic effects of repeated administrations of 20% CO2-enriched air: stability within sessions and habituation across time

Forsyth, John P, Lejuez, C.W, Finlay, Carlos·2000·Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry

Abstract

Increasingly carbon dioxide-enriched air is being used as an aversive unconditioned stimulus in laboratory examinations of anxiety. Yet, little is known about the stability of the autonomic and subjective effects of this stimulus across repeated inhalations and sessions. We examined whether repeated administrations of high concentrations of CO2-enriched air produced either habituation, stability, or sensitization across several autonomic and self-report indices within one session (Experiment 1) and then several sessions (Experiment 2) of exposure. Results suggest that non-clinical participants do not habituate to CO2 within sessions, but do show habituation on cardiac and subjective report of anxiety across sessions. Individual difference factors such as anxiety sensitivity and suffocation fear seem to moderate some of these effects, including self-reported distress and anxiety in response to the challenge. These results support the use of CO2 as a panicogenic aversive stimulus in laboratory models of fear onset and in clinical settings for interoceptive exposure treatments of panic.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0005-7916(00)00014-8

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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?

  • There is experimental evidence that pharmacological interoceptive exposure therapy can reduce anxiety disorder symptom severity either as monotherapy or as an augmentative approach.

    “There is also experimental evidence that pharmacological interoceptive exposure therapy can reduce anxiety disorder symptom severity either as monotherapy (7,121–123) or as an augmentative approach (124).”

    From Interoception and Mental Health: A Roadmap. (2018) · cites this paper as [122]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Forsyth, J. P., Lejuez, C. W., & Finlay, C.
Affiliations
  • University at Albany, State University of New York (US)
  • Brown University (US)
Corresponding author
Forsyth, John P
Venue
Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2000-06
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
103-121
ISSN
0005-7916 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2042459543
Cited by
37
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
1.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Psychosomatic Disorders and Their Treatments
Keywords
anxiety, habituation, sensitization, panic, anxiety sensitivity, interoceptive exposure, panic disorder, autonomic responses, cardiac response, individual differences
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Arousal, Autonomic Nervous System, Carbon Dioxide, Conditioning, Classical, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Habituation, Psychophysiologic, Heart Rate, Humans, Male, Panic

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