Cited by 31Memory and Neural MechanismsNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Diazepam suppresses the acquisition but not the expression of ‘fearpotentiation’ of the acoustic startle response in man

Scaife, J. C., Langley, R. W., Bradshaw, C. M., Szabadi, E.·2005·Journal of Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Sudden auditory stimuli elicit a short-latency muscular response (acoustic startle response) which is enhanced during presentation of a Pavlovian conditioned stimulus (CS) that has previously been paired with an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US) (‘fear-potentiation’). In rodents, acute treatment with benzodiazepines blocks both the acquisition of fear-potentiation and the expression of fear-potentiation induced by prior exposure to CS/US pairing. We examined the effect of diazepam on the acquisition and expression of fear-potentiation of the acoustic startle response in man. Forty-six male volunteers (18-30 years) participated in two sessions separated by 7 days. In session 1, they were exposed to 20 2-s presentations of a light (CS), 50% of which terminated with an electric shock to the wrist (1.8mA, 50ms: US). Somatosensory potentials evoked by the US were recorded from the scalp at Cz, and skin conductance responses from electrodes taped to the second and fourth fingers. In session 2, the CS was presented 20 times without the US; a random 50% of CS presentations terminated with a sound pulse (40-ms 115-dB 1-kHz); an equal number of sound pulses was presented without the CS. Electromyographic responses of the orbicularis oculi muscle to the acoustic stimuli were recorded from electrodes placed on the lower eyelid, late-latency auditory evoked potentials were recorded at Cz, and skin conductance responses from electrodes taped to the second and fourth fingers. In each session, alertness was measured using visual analogue self-rating scales and critical flicker fusion frequency. Subjects received placebo or diazepam 10mg in the two sessions in a double-blind protocol: group 1 ( n 12) placebo/placebo; group 2 ( n 11) placebo/diazepam; group 3 ( n 12) diazepam/placebo; group 4 ( n 11) diazepam/diazepam. Diazepam reduced alertness as measured by visual-analogue self-rating scales and critical flicker fusion frequency. In session 1, diazepam reduced the amplitude of the somatosensory potentials and skin conductance responses evoked by the CS. In session 2, the acoustic startle response, the N1/P2 auditory evoked response and the skin conductance response evoked by the sound stimuli were enhanced in the presence of the CS. This fear-potentiation was attenuated in subjects who received diazepam in session 1, but was not affected by the treatment given in session 2. The results indicate that diazepam blocks the acquisition of fear-potentiation of startle responses in man, as in animals, but does not prevent the expression of a previously learned response.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0269881105053285

Cites

7 of 7 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?

  • The effect of diazepam on conditioned fear did not appear to be due to a disruption of memory consolidation because diazepam blocked conditioned fear when given before but not after training.

    “This effect did not appear to be due to a disruption of memory consolidation because diazepam blocked conditioned fear when given before but not after training (Scaife et al, 2005).”
  • Diazepam was found in humans to disrupt acquisition of cued fear-potentiated startle conditioning when given before training, but not when given before a performance test that assessed expression of an acquired conditioned fear response.

    “diazepam was found in humans to disrupt acquisition of cued fear-potentiated startle conditioning when given before training, but not when given before a performance test that assessed the expression of an acquired conditioned fear response (Scaife, 2005; Scaife et al, 2005).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Scaife, J. C., Langley, R. W., Bradshaw, C. M., & Szabadi, E.
Affiliations
University of Nottingham (GB)
Corresponding author
Bradshaw, C. M.
Venue
Journal of Psychopharmacology
Published
2005-07
Volume
19
Issue
4
Pages
347-356
ISSN
  • 0269-8811 (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-7285
OpenAlex
W2016667804
Cited by
31
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.48
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
diazepam, fear potentiation, acoustic startle response, benzodiazepines, classical conditioning, fear conditioning, alertness, skin conductance response, auditory evoked potentials, critical flicker frequency, orbicularis oculi muscle
MeSH terms
Acoustic Stimulation, Adolescent, Adult, Conditioning, Classical, Cues, Diazepam, Electromyography, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Fear, Flicker Fusion, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Male, Reflex, Startle, Anti-Anxiety Agents

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