Cited by 72Memory and Neural MechanismsMemory Processes and InfluencesNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Escape from fear: A detailed behavioral analysis of two atypical responses reinforced by CS termination.

Cain, Christopher K., LeDoux, Joseph E.·2007·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes

Abstract

Escape from fear (EFF) is a controversial paradigm according to which animals learn to actively escape a fear-eliciting conditioned stimulus (CS) if the escape response (R-sub(e)) is paired with CS termination. Some theories posit that EFF learning is responsible for instrumental avoidance conditioning. However, EFF learning has typically been weaker than avoidance learning and difficult to reproduce. The authors examined EFF learning and memory with 2 atypical R-sub(e)s: rearing and nose-poking. The data suggest that rearing, but not nose-poking, can be learned as an instrumental EFF response. Further, EFF memory was response specific, aversively motivated, and controlled by the CS. Successful EFF learning also resulted in better long-term elimination of a passive fear reaction (freezing). Factors important for EFF experiments and theoretical considerations are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0097-7403.33.4.451

Cites

61 of 61 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

  • Exercising behavioral control over aversive stimuli can persistently diminish learned threat responses in rodents.

    “Studies in rodents suggest that exercising behavioral control over aversive stimuli can persistently diminish learned threat responses (Cain and LeDoux, 2007; Maier, 2015; LeDoux et al., 2017).”
  • Prior rodent research has demonstrated that behavioral control over an aversive stimulus reduces Pavlovian threat responses, even when control is no longer possible, and involves the vmPFC and striatum.

    “Prior rodent research has demonstrated that behavioral control over an aversive stimulus reduces Pavlovian threat responses, even when control is no longer possible, and involves the vmPFC and striatum (Baratta et al., 2007; Cain and LeDoux, 2007; Moscarello and LeDoux, 2013; Ramirez et al., 2015).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cain, C. K., & LeDoux, J. E.
Affiliations
New York University (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes
Published
2007
Volume
33
Issue
4
Pages
451-463
ISSN
  • 0097-7403 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-2184
OpenAlex
W1994484302
Cited by
72
References
61
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 7
FWCI
1.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Animal Behavior Processes (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (R01 MH 46516; R37 MH 38774; K05 MH 067048, NRSA 1F32MH077458-01, R21 MH072279)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
fear memory, freezing behavior, aversive motivation, response specificity, escape learning
MeSH terms
Animals, Association Learning, Avoidance Learning, Conditioning, Classical, Conditioning, Operant, Escape Reaction, Exploratory Behavior, Extinction, Psychological, Fear, Grooming, Male, Motor Activity, Mental Recall, Reinforcement Schedule, Rats, Sprague-Dawley, Immobility Response, Tonic, Rats

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