uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Social, proximal and conditioned threat
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Humanities and Social Sciences, Faculty of Social Sciences, Department of Psychology.
2017 (English)In: Neurobiology of Learning and Memory, ISSN 1074-7427, E-ISSN 1095-9564Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Responding to threats in the environment is crucial for survival. Certain types of threat produce defensive responses without necessitating previous experience and are considered innate, whereas other threats are learned by experiencing aversive consequences. Two important innate threats are whether an encountered stimulus is a member of the same species (social threat) and whether a stimulus suddenly appears proximal to the body (proximal threat). These threats are manifested early in human development and robustly elicit defensive responses. Learned threat, on the other hand, enables adaptation to threats in the environment throughout the life span. A well-studied form of learned threat is fear conditioning, during which a neutral stimulus acquires the ability to eliciting defensive responses through pairings with an aversive stimulus. If innate threats can facilitate fear conditioning, and whether different types of innate threats can enhance each other, is largely unknown. We developed an immersive virtual reality paradigm to test how innate social and proximal threats are related to each other and how they influence conditioned fear. Skin conductance responses were used to index the autonomic component of the defensive response. We found that social threat modulates proximal threat, but that neither proximal nor social threat modulates conditioned fear. Our results suggest that distinct processes regulate autonomic activity in response to proximal and social threat on the one hand, and conditioned fear on the other.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2017.
National Category
Psychology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-322732DOI: 10.1016/j.nlm.2017.05.014OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-322732DiVA: diva2:1099737
Available from: 2017-05-29 Created: 2017-05-29 Last updated: 2017-05-29

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full texthttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1074742716303781

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Rosén, JörgenKastrati, GranitÅhs, Fredrik
By organisation
Department of Psychology
In the same journal
Neurobiology of Learning and Memory
Psychology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

Altmetric score

Total: 33 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf