CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 94Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive ProcessesMemory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

What Is Going On Around Here? Intolerance of Uncertainty Predicts Threat Generalization

Open access
Morriss, Jayne, Macdonald, Birthe, van Reekum, Carien M.·2016·PLOS ONE
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0154494PMC PMC4864232
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Attending to stimuli that share perceptual similarity to learned threats is an adaptive strategy. However, prolonged threat generalization to cues signalling safety is considered a core feature of pathological anxiety. One potential factor that may sustain over-generalization is sensitivity to future threat uncertainty. To assess the extent to which Intolerance of Uncertainty (IU) predicts threat generalization, we recorded skin conductance in 54 healthy participants during an associative learning paradigm, where threat and safety cues varied in perceptual similarity. Lower IU was associated with stronger discrimination between threat and safety cues during acquisition and extinction. Higher IU, however, was associated with generalized responding to threat and safety cues during acquisition, and delayed discrimination between threat and safety cues during extinction. These results were specific to IU, over and above other measures of anxious disposition. These findings highlight: (1) a critical role of uncertainty-based mechanisms in threat generalization, and (2) IU as a potential risk factor for anxiety disorder development.

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 · 10.1371/journal.pone.0154494

Cites

10 of 10 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?

  • People high in intolerance of uncertainty show slower fear extinction than people low in intolerance of uncertainty.

    “Two recent studies have demonstrated that individuals with high intolerance of uncertainty do not discriminate between threat and safety cues during fear acquisition and have slower fear extinction than those with low intolerance of uncertainty (Morriss, Macdonald, & van Reekum, 2016; Morriss, Christakou, & van Reekum, 2016).”

    From Enhancing Inhibitory Learning: The Utility of Variability in Exposure (2019) · cites this paper as Morriss, Macdonald, & van Reekum, 2016

    The Results (SCR magnitude; page unavailable) and Discussion report that people with higher intolerance of uncertainty discriminated between threat and safety cues later than those with lower intolerance during extinction. The Discussion says this *may* prolong the exposure needed to extinguish threat; it does not establish slower fear extinction itself as a measured outcome. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Intolerance of uncertainty may influence fear learning and fear extinction.

    “Intolerance of uncertainty may affect fear learning and fear extinction.”

    From Enhancing Inhibitory Learning: The Utility of Variability in Exposure (2019) · cites this paper as Morriss, Macdonald, & van Reekum, 2016

  • People high in intolerance of uncertainty do not discriminate between threat and safety cues during fear acquisition.

    “Two recent studies have demonstrated that individuals with high intolerance of uncertainty do not discriminate between threat and safety cues during fear acquisition and have slower fear extinction than those with low intolerance of uncertainty (Morriss, Macdonald, & van Reekum, 2016; Morriss, Christakou, & van Reekum, 2016).”

    From Enhancing Inhibitory Learning: The Utility of Variability in Exposure (2019) · cites this paper as Morriss, Macdonald, & van Reekum, 2016

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: 25

  1. [2]Norrholm SD, Jovanovic T, Briscione MA, Anderson KM, Kwon CK, Warren VT, et al Generalization of fear-potentiated startle in the presence of auditory cues: a parametric analysis. Frontiers in behavioral neuroscience. 2014; 8. PMC4201100 25368559
  2. [3]Lissek S, Bradford DE, Alvarez RP, Burton P, Sturges TE, Reynolds RC, et al Neural substrates of classically conditioned fear-generalization in humans: a parametric fMRI study. Social cognitive and affective neuroscience. 2013: nst096. PMC4127021 23748500
  3. [5]Dunsmoor JE, White AJ, LaBar KS. Conceptual similarity promotes generalization of higher order fear learning. Learning & Memory. 2011; 18(3): 156– 60. 21330378 PMC3056515
  4. [6]Haddad AD, Pritchett D, Lissek S, Lau JY. Trait anxiety and fear responses to safety cues: Stimulus generalization or sensitization? Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment. 2012; 34(3): 323– 31.
  5. [7]Greenberg T, Carlson JM, Cha J, Hajcak G, Mujica-Parodi LR. Neural reactivity tracks fear generalization gradients. Biological psychology. 2013; 92(1): 2– 8. 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.12.007 22200657 · DOI
  6. [8]Torrents-Rodas D, Fullana MA, Bonillo A, Caseras X, Andión O, Torrubia R. No effect of trait anxiety on differential fear conditioning or fear generalization. Biological psychology. 2013; 92(2): 185– 90. 10.1016/j.biopsycho.2012.10.006 23131617 · DOI
  7. [9]Milad MR, Wright CI, Orr SP, Pitman RK, Quirk GJ, Rauch SL. Recall of fear extinction in humans activates the ventromedial prefrontal cortex and hippocampus in concert. Biological psychiatry. 2007; 62(5): 446– 54. 17217927
  8. [11]Dunsmoor JE, Prince SE, Murty VP, Kragel PA, LaBar KS. Neurobehavioral mechanisms of human fear generalization. Neuroimage. 2011; 55(4): 1878– 88. 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.01.041 21256233 PMC3062636 · DOI
  9. [12]Lissek S, Grillon C. Learning models of PTSD The Oxford Handbook of Traumatic Stress Disorders: Oxford University Press New York; 2012.
  10. [14]Lissek S, Kaczkurkin AN, Rabin S, Geraci M, Pine DS, Grillon C. Generalized anxiety disorder is associated with overgeneralization of classically conditioned fear. Biological psychiatry. 2014; 75(11): 909– 15. 10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.07.025 24001473 PMC3938992 · DOI
  11. [15]Greenberg T, Carlson JM, Cha J, Hajcak G, Mujica‐Parodi LR. Ventromedial prefrontal cortex reactivity is altered in generalized anxiety disorder during fear generalization. Depression and anxiety. 2013; 30(3): 242– 50. 10.1002/da.22016 23139148 · DOI
  12. [16]Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene R, Vagg P, Jacobs G. Consulting Psychologists Press, Inc. 2». Palo Alto (CA). 1983.
  13. [17]Dugas MJ, Buhr K, Ladouceur R. The Role of Intolerance of Uncertainty in Etiology and Maintenance of Generalized Anxiety Disorder In: Heimberg R. G., Turk C. L., & Mennin D. S. (Eds.), Generalized anxiety disorder: advances in research and practice (pp. 143– 163). New York: Guilford Press 2004.
  14. [18]McEvoy PM, Mahoney AE. To be sure, to be sure: Intolerance of uncertainty mediates symptoms of various anxiety disorders and depression. Behavior therapy. 2012; 43(3): 533– 45. 10.1016/j.beth.2011.02.007 22697442 · DOI · Paper page
  15. [20]Gentes EL, Ruscio AM. A meta-analysis of the relation of intolerance of uncertainty to symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and obsessive–compulsive disorder. Clinical Psychology Review. 2011; 31(6): 923– 33. 10.1016/j.cpr.2011.05.001 21664339 · DOI · Paper page
  16. [22]Thibodeau MA, Carleton RN, McEvoy PM, Zvolensky MJ, Brandt CP, Boelen PA, et al Developing scales measuring disorder-specific intolerance of uncertainty (DSIU): A new perspective on transdiagnostic. Journal of anxiety disorders. 2015; 31: 49– 57. 10.1016/j.janxdis.2015.01.006 25728016 · DOI · Paper page
  17. [25]Nelson BD, Weinberg A, Pawluk J, Gawlowska M, Proudfit GH. An Event-Related Potential Investigation of Fear Generalization and Intolerance of Uncertainty. Behavior Therapy. 2014. 26459846
  18. [28]Carleton RN, Duranceau S, Freeston MH, Boelen PA, McCabe RE, Antony MM. “But it might be a heart attack”: Intolerance of uncertainty and panic disorder symptoms. Journal of anxiety disorders. 2014; 28(5): 463– 70. 10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.04.006 24873884 · DOI · Paper page
  19. [29]Gorka SM, Lieberman L, Nelson BD, Sarapas C, Shankman SA. Aversive responding to safety signals in panic disorder: The moderating role of intolerance of uncertainty. Journal of anxiety disorders. 2014; 28(7): 731– 6. 10.1016/j.janxdis.2014.06.004 25173980 PMC4160405 · DOI
  20. [30]Dymond S, Dunsmoor JE, Vervliet B, Roche B, Hermans D. Fear generalization in humans: systematic review and implications for anxiety disorder research. Behavior Therapy. 2014. 26459838
  21. [31]Barrett J, Armony J. Influence of trait anxiety on brain activity during the acquisition and extinction of aversive conditioning. Psychological medicine. 2009; 39(02): 255– 65. 18466667
  22. [32]Neumann DL, Waters AM. The use of an unpleasant sound as an unconditional stimulus in a human aversive Pavlovian conditioning procedure. Biological psychology. 2006; 73(2): 175– 85. 16698165
  23. [34]Buhr K, Dugas MJ. The intolerance of uncertainty scale: psychometric properties of the English version. Behaviour research and therapy. 2002; 40(8): 931– 45. 12186356
  24. [35]Holt DJ, Boeke EA, Wolthusen RP, Nasr S, Milad MR, Tootell RB. A parametric study of fear generalization to faces and non-face objects: relationship to discrimination thresholds. Frontiers in human neuroscience. 2014; 8. 25249955 PMC4155784
  25. [36]Boucsein W. Electrodermal activity: Springer Science & Business Media; 2012.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Morriss, J., Macdonald, B., & van Reekum, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Reading (GB)
ORCID
Venue
PLOS ONE
Publisher
Public Library of Science (PLoS)
Published
2016-05-11
Volume
11
Issue
5
Pages
e0154494
ISSN
1932-6203 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0154494
PMC
PMC4864232
OpenAlex
W2371542162
Cited by
94
References
10
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9
FWCI
12.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PLoS ONE (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • CentAUR (University of Reading) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • ePrints Soton (University of Southampton) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Zurich Open Repository and Archive (University of Zurich) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Medical Research Council (MR/J003980/1)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
Keywords
intolerance of uncertainty, threat generalization, anxiety, perceptual similarity, associative learning, extinction, skin conductance
MeSH terms
Extinction, Psychological, Fear, Female, Galvanic Skin Response, Humans, Male, Uncertainty, Multilevel Analysis, Young Adult

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