Cited by 75Memory and Neural MechanismsNeural and Behavioral Psychology StudiesAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes

Neural substrates of individual differences in human fear learning: Evidence from concurrent fMRI, fear-potentiated startle, and US-expectancy data

Open access
van Well, Sonja, Visser, Renée M., Scholte, H. Steven, Kindt, Merel·2012·Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience

Abstract

To provide insight into individual differences in fear learning, we examined the emotional and cognitive expressions of discriminative fear conditioning in direct relation to its neural substrates. Contrary to previous behavioral-neural (fMRI) research on fear learning--in which the emotional expression of fear was generally indexed by skin conductance--we used fear-potentiated startle, a more reliable and specific index of fear. While we obtained concurrent fear-potentiated startle, neuroimaging (fMRI), and US-expectancy data, healthy participants underwent a fear-conditioning paradigm in which one of two conditioned stimuli (CS(+) but not CS(-)) was paired with a shock (unconditioned stimulus [US]). Fear learning was evident from the differential expressions of fear (CS(+) > CS(-)) at both the behavioral level (startle potentiation and US expectancy) and the neural level (in amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, and insula). We examined individual differences in discriminative fear conditioning by classifying participants (as conditionable vs. unconditionable) according to whether they showed successful differential startle potentiation. This revealed that the individual differences in the emotional expression of discriminative fear learning (startle potentiation) were reflected in differential amygdala activation, regardless of the cognitive expression of fear learning (CS-US contingency or hippocampal activation). Our study provides the first evidence for the potential of examining startle potentiation in concurrent fMRI research on fear learning.

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 · 10.3758/s13415-012-0089-7

Cites

65 of 65 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?

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

1 of the 66 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Well, S., Visser, R. M., Scholte, H. S., & Kindt, M.
Affiliations
University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Kindt, Merel
Venue
Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience
Published
2012-03-27
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
499-512
ISSN
  • 1530-7026 (ISSN-L)
  • 1531-135X
OpenAlex
W2138621122
Cited by
75
References
66
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UvA-DARE (University of Amsterdam) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory and Neural Mechanisms
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Anxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Keywords
fear learning, individual differences, fear-potentiated startle, amygdala, anterior cingulate cortex, hippocampus, insula
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Amygdala, Anxiety, Brain Mapping, Conditioning, Classical, Fear, Female, Hippocampus, Humans, Individuality, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Male, Reflex, Startle

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