Cited by 131Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Human amygdala activity during the expression of fear responses.

Cheng, Dominic T., Knight, David C., Smith, Christine N., Helmstetter, Fred J.·2006·Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

The initial learning and subsequent behavioral expression of fear are often viewed as independent processes with potentially unique neural substrates. Laboratory animal studies of Pavlovian fear conditioning suggest that the amygdala is important for both forming stimulus associations and for subsequently expressing learned behavioral responses. In the present article, human amygdala activity was studied during the autonomic expression of conditional fear in two differential conditioning experiments with event-related functional magnetic resonance imaging and concurrent recording of skin conductance responses (SCRs). Trials were classified on the basis of individual participants' SCRs. Significant amygdala responding was detected only during trials on which a signal both predicted shock and elicited significant conditional SCR. Conditional stimulus presentation or autonomic activity alone was not sufficient. These results indicate that amygdala activity may specifically reflect the expression of learned fear responses and support the position that this region plays a central role in the expression of emotional reactions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0735-7044.120.5.1187

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Studies using a delay differential cue-conditioning paradigm were focused on because other paradigms (trace or single-cue) appear to engage non-overlapping neural responses.

    “We focused on studies using a delay differential cue-conditioning paradigm given that other paradigms (for example, trace or single-cue) appear to engage non-overlapping neural responses.6,19”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Cheng, D. T., Knight, D. C., Smith, C. N., & Helmstetter, F. J.
Affiliations
University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee (US)
Venue
Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2006
Volume
120
Issue
6
Pages
1187-1195
ISSN
  • 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0084
OpenAlex
W2012065259
Cited by
131
References
38
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 12 · 2012: 9
FWCI
3.88
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • McDonnell-Pew Foundation
  • National Institute of Mental Health (MH060668)
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
amygdala, fear expression, fear conditioning, skin conductance response, emotional learning, conditioned stimulus
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Amygdala, Analysis of Variance, Animals, Brain Mapping, Conditioning, Classical, Electric Stimulation, Fear, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Oxygen, Photic Stimulation, Expressed Emotion

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