Impact of continuous versus intermittent CS-UCS pairing on human brain activation during Pavlovian fear conditioning.
Abstract
During Pavlovian fear conditioning a conditioned stimulus (CS) is repeatedly paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (UCS). In many studies the CS and UCS are paired on every trial, whereas in others the CS and UCS are paired intermittently. To better understand the influence of the CS-UCS pairing rate on brain activity, the experimenters presented continuously, intermittently, and non-paired CSs during fear conditioning. Amygdala, anterior cingulate, and fusiform gyrus activity increased linearly with the CS-UCS pairing rate. In contrast, insula and left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex responses were larger during intermittently paired CS presentations relative to continuously and non-paired CSs. These results demonstrate two distinct patterns of activity in disparate brain regions. Amygdala, anterior cingulate, and fusiform gyrus activity paralleled the CS-UCS pairing rate, whereas the insula and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex appeared to respond to the uncertainty inherent in intermittent CS-UCS pairing procedures. These findings may further clarify the role of these brain regions in Pavlovian fear conditioning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
The same experimental design has previously been shown to successfully evoke concomitant threat extinction psychophysiology and brain activation in adult populations.
“We have previously shown the same experimental design to successfully evoke concomitant threat extinction psychophysiology and brain activation in adult populations41,44, similar to other labs using 100% reinforcement45.”
From Multimodal evidence for delayed threat extinction learning in adolescence and young adulthood (2019) · cites this paper as [45]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 56 · Cited by 137
- Authors
- Dunsmoor, J. E., Bandettini, P. A., & Knight, D. C.
- Affiliations
- National Institutes of Health (US)
- Venue
- Behavioral Neuroscience
- Published
- 2007
- Volume
- 121
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 635-642
- ISSN
- 0735-7044 (ISSN-L)
- 1939-0084
- OpenAlex
- W2124572421
- Cited by
- 137
- References
- 56
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 11
- FWCI
- 2.99
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Keywords
- fear conditioning, amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, fusiform gyrus, insula, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, uncertainty, brain activation
- MeSH terms
- Acoustic Stimulation, Adult, Analysis of Variance, Brain, Brain Mapping, Conditioning, Classical, Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation, Fear, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Functional Laterality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen, Time Factors, Area Under Curve
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
