↓ Skip to main content

A parametric study of fear generalization to faces and non-face objects: relationship to discrimination thresholds

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A parametric study of fear generalization to faces and non-face objects: relationship to discrimination thresholds
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00624
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daphne J. Holt, Emily A. Boeke, Rick P. F. Wolthusen, Shahin Nasr, Mohammed R. Milad, Roger B. H. Tootell

Abstract

Fear generalization is the production of fear responses to a stimulus that is similar-but not identical-to a threatening stimulus. Although prior studies have found that fear generalization magnitudes are qualitatively related to the degree of perceptual similarity to the threatening stimulus, the precise relationship between these two functions has not been measured systematically. Also, it remains unknown whether fear generalization mechanisms differ for social and non-social information. To examine these questions, we measured perceptual discrimination and fear generalization in the same subjects, using images of human faces and non-face control stimuli ("blobs") that were perceptually matched to the faces. First, each subject's ability to discriminate between pairs of faces or blobs was measured. Each subject then underwent a Pavlovian fear conditioning procedure, in which each of the paired conditioned stimuli (CS) were either followed (CS+) or not followed (CS-) by a shock. Skin conductance responses (SCRs) were also measured. Subjects were then presented with the CS+, CS- and five levels of a CS+-to-CS- morph continuum between the paired stimuli, which were identified based on individual discrimination thresholds. Finally, subjects rated the likelihood that each stimulus had been followed by a shock. Subjects showed both autonomic (SCR-based) and conscious (ratings-based) fear responses to morphs that they could not discriminate from the CS+ (generalization). For both faces and non-face objects, fear generalization was not found above discrimination thresholds. However, subjects exhibited greater fear generalization in the shock likelihood ratings compared to the SCRs, particularly for faces. These findings reveal that autonomic threat detection mechanisms in humans are highly sensitive to small perceptual differences between stimuli. Also, the conscious evaluation of threat shows broader generalization than autonomic responses, biased towards labeling a stimulus as threatening.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
France 1 1%
Belgium 1 1%
Unknown 79 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 26%
Student > Master 11 13%
Student > Bachelor 11 13%
Researcher 10 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Other 14 17%
Unknown 7 9%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 40 49%
Neuroscience 16 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 1%
Other 2 2%
Unknown 18 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 September 2014.
All research outputs
#17,723,634
of 22,758,963 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,703
of 7,138 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,324
of 238,407 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#213
of 262 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,758,963 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,138 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 238,407 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 262 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.