The DOI matches its Crossref record; 10 of the 10 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Fear‐potentiated startle conditioning in humans: Explicit and contextual cue conditioning following paired versus unpaired training
Abstract
Conditioned fear in response to explicit and contextual cues was examined using the startle reflex in three groups of participants over two sessions separated by 4–5 days. The conditioned stimulus (CS) was paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) (shock) during conditioning in the paired but not in the unpaired group. In the reaction time (RT) group, the US was a nonaversive visual signal for an RT task. In the paired group, the CS potentiated startle in the postconditioning phase. This conditioned response was fully retained over the retention interval. There was no substantial change in baseline startle (startle delivered in the absence of CS). By contrast, startle was not potentiated by the CS in the unpaired group, but baseline startle was increased from Session 1 to Session 2. In the RT group, startle was not affected by the CS, and baseline startle was reduced from Session 1 to Session 2. These results suggest that paired presentations of a CS and an aversive US result in conditioned fear in response to the CS but little contextual fear, whereas unpaired presentations of a CS and US leads to poor explicit cue conditioning but substantial contextual fear.
Overview
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Differential contribution of amygdala and hippocampus to cued and contextual fear conditioning.
Phillips, R. G., & LeDoux, J. E. (1992) · Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.106.2.274 · Cited by 3,292
Modality-Specific Retrograde Amnesia of Fear
Kim, J. J., & Fanselow, M. S. (1992) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1585183 · Cited by 2,483
Emotion, attention, and the startle reflex
Lang, P. J., Bradley, M. M., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1990) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.97.3.377 · Cited by 2,205
Conditioned fear as revealed by magnitude of startle response to an auditory stimulus.
Brown, J. S., Kalish, H. I., & Farber, I. E. (1951) · Journal of Experimental Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0060166 · Cited by 637
Fear‐Potentiated Startle in Humans: Effects of Anticipatory Anxiety on the Acoustic Blink Reflex
Grillon, C., AMELI, R., Woods, S. W., Merikangas, K., & Davis, M. (1991) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1991.tb01999.x · Cited by 462
Self-citationHitchcock, J. M., & Davis, M. (1991) · Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.105.6.826 · Cited by 345
Self-citationBaseline and fear-potentiated startle in panic disorder patients
Grillon, C., Ameli, R., Goddard, A., Woods, S. W., & Davis, M. (1994) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/0006-3223(94)90040-x · Cited by 212
Self-citationFanselow, M. S., Kim, J. J., Yipp, J., & De Oca, B. (1994) · Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.108.2.235 · Cited by 142
Kim, M., & Davis, M. (1993) · Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.1037/0735-7044.107.4.580 · Cited by 139
Self-citationContextual associations in trace conditioning
Marlin, N. A. (1981) · Animal Learning & Behavior · doi:10.3758/bf03209784 · Cited by 109
Cited by
Phasic vs Sustained Fear in Rats and Humans: Role of the Extended Amygdala in Fear vs Anxiety
Davis, M., Walker, D. L., Miles, L., & Grillon, C. (2010) · Neuropsychopharmacology · doi:10.1038/npp.2009.109 · Cited by 1,513
“These results suggest that context conditioning measured with acoustic startle amplitude should be greater after temporally unpredictable shocks compared with predictable shocks in humans, and this is exactly what we found (Grillon and Davis, 1997).”
BackgroundMethodResultSelf-citationKoch, M. (1999) · Progress in Neurobiology · doi:10.1016/s0301-0082(98)00098-7 · Cited by 1,287
Fear and anxiety: Animal models and human cognitive psychophysiology
Lang, P. J., Davis, M., & Öhman, A. (2000) · Journal of Affective Disorders · doi:10.1016/s0165-0327(00)00343-8 · Cited by 1,162
Self-citationNeural systems involved in fear and anxiety measured with fear-potentiated startle.
Davis, M. (2006) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.61.8.741 · Cited by 592
Self-citationAre different parts of the extended amygdala involved in fear versus anxiety?
Davis, M. (1998) · Biological Psychiatry · doi:10.1016/s0006-3223(98)00288-1 · Cited by 549
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- GRILLON, C., & DAVIS, M.
- Venue
- Psychophysiology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-07
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 451-458
- ISSN
- 0048-5772 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-8986
- OpenAlex
- W2133029319
- Cited by
- 220
- References
- 10
- FWCI
- 3.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fear‐potentiated startle conditioning in humans: Explicit and contextual cue conditioning following paired versus unpaired training. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02389.x
- The paper
- GRILLON, C., & DAVIS, M. (1997). Fear‐potentiated startle conditioning in humans: Explicit and contextual cue conditioning following paired versus unpaired training. Psychophysiology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.1997.tb02389.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
