Cited by 130Pain Management and Placebo EffectPain Mechanisms and TreatmentsMemory and Neural Mechanisms

Classical conditioning of analgesic and hyperalgesic pain responses without conscious awareness

Open access
Jensen, Karin, Kirsch, Irving, Odmalm, Sara, Kaptchuk, Ted J., Ingvar, Martin·2015·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

Significance: It is unclear to what extent new learning can take place outside of conscious awareness. In the present study, we used psychophysical measures and classical conditioning to establish whether psychologically mediated analgesic and hyperalgesic responses could be acquired by unseen (subliminally presented) stimuli. Our study demonstrates that analgesia and hyperalgesia can be learned without conscious awareness, suggesting that higher-order cognitive processes may be affected by implicit learning mechanisms.

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 · 10.1073/pnas.1504567112

Cites

38 of 38 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?

  • Because expectations of low pain are more easily extinguished and more sensitive to sensory evidence, the positive PE condition was more vulnerable to an unmeasured variable than the negative PE condition.

    “It is plausible that because expectations of low pain are more easily extinguished and more sensitive to sensory evidence18–21, the corresponding positive PE condition was more vulnerable to an unmeasured variable than the negative PE condition.”

    From Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results report a larger hyperalgesic than analgesic effect, and the Discussion suggests threat-related cues may be more salient than safety-related cues. Neither passage establishes that expectations of low pain are more easily extinguished or more sensitive to sensory evidence. The cited paper also does not assess vulnerability to an unmeasured variable; the citing authors present that as their own inference. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a subliminal pain conditioning procedure, nocebo responses have been shown to be significantly stronger than placebo responses.

    “Nocebo responses have been shown to be significantly stronger than placebo responses in a subliminal pain conditioning procedure, and this finding was related to the higher salience of nocebo cues19.”

    From Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results report that the hyperalgesic effect was significantly larger than the analgesic effect (P < 0.001), supporting the comparison in the claim. The Discussion suggests that threat-related cues may be more salient during rapid exposures, but presents this as a possible explanation, not an established reason for the difference. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nocebo responses are stronger than placebo responses.

    “Nocebo responses are stronger, more difficult to extinguish and less sensitive to sensory evidence than placebo responses8,18–20.”

    From Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

  • Nocebo responses are more difficult to extinguish than placebo responses.

    “Nocebo responses are stronger, more difficult to extinguish and less sensitive to sensory evidence than placebo responses8,18–20.”

    From Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Results and Discussion report that conditioned hyperalgesic responses were stronger than analgesic responses, but neither section compares how readily the two responses extinguish. A search for extinction and resistance to extinction found no passage supporting the attributed comparison. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Nocebo responses are less sensitive to sensory evidence than placebo responses.

    “Nocebo responses are stronger, more difficult to extinguish and less sensitive to sensory evidence than placebo responses8,18–20.”

    From Boundary effects of expectation in human pain perception (2019) · cites this paper as [19]

    The Discussion (page unavailable) says conditioned hyperalgesia was stronger than analgesia, but does not compare how sensitive the two responses were to sensory evidence. The Results (page unavailable) report that perceived pain during conditioning was associated with conditioned responses, without establishing a difference in sensitivity between them. A search for the claimed comparison found no supporting passage in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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. [26]Kirsch I. Response Expectancy: An Introduction. American Psychological Association; Washington, DC: 1999. [Google Scholar]

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jensen, K., Kirsch, I., Odmalm, S., Kaptchuk, T. J., & Ingvar, M.
Affiliations
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • Karolinska Institutet (SE)
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
2015-05-15
Volume
112
Issue
25
Pages
7863-7867
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W1570298792
Cited by
130
References
38
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 14 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 7
FWCI
11.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (K24AT004095, 2K24 AT004096)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Pain Management and Placebo Effect
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Pain Mechanisms and Treatments
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
Keywords
classical conditioning, conditioned analgesia, subliminal perception, conscious awareness, extinction, conditioned pain modulation
MeSH terms
Analgesia, Awareness, Conditioning, Classical, Humans, Hyperalgesia, Pain

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