Search

Fear and anxiety are rarely confined to specific stimuli or situations. In fear generalisation, there is a spread of fear responses elicited by physically dissimilar generalisation stimuli (GS) along a continuum between danger and safety. The current study investigated fear generalisation with a novel online task using COVID-19-relevant stimuli (i.e., busy or quiet shopping street/mall scenes) during pandemic lockdown restrictions in the United Kingdom. Participants (N = 50) first completed clinically relevant trait measures before commencing a habituation phase, where two conditioned stimuli (CSs; i.e., a busy or quiet high street/mall scene) were presented. Participants then underwent fear conditioning where one conditioned stimulus (CS+) was followed by an aversive unconditioned stimulus (US; a loud female scream accompanied by a facial photograph of a female displaying a fearful emotion) and another (CS-) was not. In a test phase, six generalisation stimuli were presented where the US was withheld, and participants provided threat expectancy and fear ratings for all stimuli. Following successful conditioning, fear generalization was observed for both threat expectancy and fear ratings. Trait worry partially predicted generalised threat expectancy and COVID-19 fear strongly predicted generalised fear. In conclusion, a generalisation gradient was evident using an online remote generalisation task with images of busy/quiet streets during the pandemic. Worry and fear of COVID-19 predicted fear generalisation., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to impact global psychological wellbeing. To investigate the sustained impact of COVID-19 on wellbeing, the current study longitudinally assessed fear of COVID-19, anxiety, depression, intolerance of uncertainty, worry, sleep quality, loneliness and alcohol use during the pandemic in the United Kingdom. Timepoint 1 (T1; N  = 445) took place in February 2021 following the highest number of pandemic-related deaths in the UK. Timepoint 2 (T2, N  = 198) took place in June 2021 when pandemic-related deaths had declined considerably, and many had been vaccinated. At T1, COVID-19 fear predicted elevated levels of anxiety, depression, intolerance of uncertainty, worry, sleep quality and loneliness. At T2, we observed that levels of COVID-19 fear, depression, loneliness and sleep quality decreased. However, COVID-19 fear continued to predict elevated intolerance of uncertainty, worry and impaired sleep quality. These findings demonstrate the longitudinal impact of COVID-19 fear on psychological wellbeing.

Background and Objectives: In counterconditioning, a conditioned aversive stimulus (CS) is paired with an appetitive stimulus to reduce fear and avoidance. Findings are, however, mixed on the relative impact of counterconditioning versus standard extinction, where the CS is presented in the absence of the aversive event. This analogue treatment study investigated the impact of counterconditioning relative to standard extinction on threat expectancy, fear, and persistent avoidance with an online fear-conditioning task conducted with COVID-19-relevant appetitive stimuli during the pandemic., Methods: Following habituation, in which two CSs (male faces wearing face-coverings) were presented in the absence of the unconditioned stimulus (US; a loud female scream), participants (n = 123) underwent threat-conditioning where one stimulus (CS+) was followed by the US and another (CS-) was not. In avoidance learning, the US could be prevented by making a simple response in the presence of the CS+. Next, participants received either counterconditioning in which trial-unique positively rated images of scenes from before the COVID-19 pandemic and its associated restrictions (e.g., hugging others and holding hands) were presented with the CS + or no-counterconditioning (i.e., extinction). In the final test phase, avoidance was available, and all US deliveries were withheld., Results: Counterconditioning led to diminished threat expectancy and reduced avoidance relative to no-counterconditioning. Fear ratings did not differ between groups., Limitations: No physiological measures were obtained., Conclusions: Implemented online during the pandemic with COVID-19-relevant appetitive stimuli, counterconditioning was effective at reducing persistent avoidance and threat expectancy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors have no interests to declare., (Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Approach-avoidance paradigms create a competition between appetitive and aversive contingencies and are widely used in nonhuman research on anxiety. Here, we examined how instructions about threat and avoidance impact control by competing contingencies over human approach-avoidance behavior. Additionally, Experiment 1 examined the effects of threat magnitude (money loss amount) and avoidance cost (fixed ratio requirements), whereas Experiment 2 examined the effects of threat information (available, unavailable and inaccurate) on approach-avoidance. During the task, approach responding was modeled by reinforcing responding with money on a FR schedule. By performing an observing response, participants produced an escalating "threat meter". Instructions stated that the threat meter levels displayed the current probability of losing money, when in fact loss only occurred when the level reached the maximum. Instructions also stated pressing an avoidance button lowered the threat level. Overall, instructions produced cycles of approach and avoidance responding with transitions from approach to avoidance when threat was high and transitions back to approach after avoidance reduced threat. Experiment 1 revealed increasing avoidance cost, but not threat magnitude, shifted approach-avoidance transitions to higher threat levels and increased anxiety ratings, but did not influence the frequency of approach-avoidance cycles. Experiment 2 revealed when threat level information was available or absent earnings were high, but earnings decreased when inaccurate threat information was incompatible with contingencies. Our findings build on prior nonhuman and human approach-avoidance research by highlighting how instructed threat and avoidance can impact human AA behavior and self-reported anxiety., (© 2017 Society for the Experimental Analysis of Behavior.)

Background and Objectives: Conditioned fear may emerge in the absence of directly experienced conditioned stimulus (CS)--unconditioned stimulus (US) pairings. Here, we compared three pathways by which avoidance of the US may be acquired both directly (i.e., through trial-and-error instrumental learning) and indirectly (i.e., via verbal instructions and social observation)., Methods: Following fear conditioning in which CS+ was paired with shock and CS- was unpaired, three separate groups of participants learned by direct experience (Instrumental-learning), were instructed about (Instructed-learning), or observed (Observational-learning) a demonstrator performing an avoidance response that canceled upcoming US (shock) presentations. Groups were then tested in extinction with presentations of the directly experienced CS+ and CS-, and either a novel CS (Instrumental and observational groups) or an instructed CS (instructed-group)., Results: Similar to instrumental learning, results demonstrate that avoidance may be acquired via instructions and social observation in the absence of directly learning that an avoidance response prevents the US. Retrospective US expectancy ratings were modulated by the assumed presence or absence of avoidance. Overall, these findings suggest that instrumental-, instructed-, and observational-learning pathways to avoidance in humans are similar., Limitations: Alternative experimental designs would permit direct comparison between the pathways for stimuli with no prior experience of fear conditioning, and trial-by-trial US expectancy ratings would help track the modulation of fear by avoidance pathway., Conclusions: Instrumental-, instructed-, and observational-learning pathways of avoidance are similar. Findings may have implications for understanding the etiology of clinical avoidance in anxiety., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Excessive avoidance behavior, in which an instrumental action prevents an upcoming aversive event, is a defining feature of anxiety disorders. Left unchecked, both fear and avoidance of potentially threatening stimuli may generalize to perceptually related stimuli and situations. The behavioral consequences of generalization mean that aversive learning experiences with specific threats may lead to the inference that classes of related stimuli are threatening, potentially dangerous, and need to be avoided, despite differences in physical form. Little is known however about avoidance generalization in humans and the learning pathways by which it may be transmitted. In the present study, we compared two pathways to avoidance-instructions and social observation-on subsequent generalization of avoidance behavior, fear expectancy and physiological arousal. Participants first learned that one cue was a danger cue (conditioned stimulus, CS+) and another was a safety cue (CS-). Groups were then either instructed that a simple avoidance response in the presence of the CS+ cancelled upcoming shock (instructed-learning group) or observed a short movie showing a demonstrator performing the avoidance response to prevent shock (observational-learning group). During generalization testing, danger and safety cues were presented along with generalization stimuli that parametrically varied in perceptual similarity to the CS+. Reinstatement of fear and avoidance was also tested. Findings demonstrate, for the first time, generalization of socially transmitted and instructed avoidance: both groups showed comparable generalization gradients in fear expectancy, avoidance behavior and arousal. Return of fear was evident, suggesting that generalized avoidance remains persistent following extinction testing. The utility of the present paradigm for research on avoidance generalization is discussed.