↓ Skip to main content

Gradual extinction prevents the return of fear: implications for the discovery of state

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (82nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
241 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
Gradual extinction prevents the return of fear: implications for the discovery of state
Published in
Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00164
Pubmed ID
Authors

Samuel J. Gershman, Carolyn E. Jones, Kenneth A. Norman, Marie-H. Monfils, Yael Niv

Abstract

Fear memories are notoriously difficult to erase, often recovering over time. The longstanding explanation for this finding is that, in extinction training, a new memory is formed that competes with the old one for expression but does not otherwise modify it. This explanation is at odds with traditional models of learning such as Rescorla-Wagner and reinforcement learning. A possible reconciliation that was recently suggested is that extinction training leads to the inference of a new state that is different from the state that was in effect in the original training. This solution, however, raises a new question: under what conditions are new states, or new memories formed? Theoretical accounts implicate persistent large prediction errors in this process. As a test of this idea, we reasoned that careful design of the reinforcement schedule during extinction training could reduce these prediction errors enough to prevent the formation of a new memory, while still decreasing reinforcement sufficiently to drive modification of the old fear memory. In two Pavlovian fear-conditioning experiments, we show that gradually reducing the frequency of aversive stimuli, rather than eliminating them abruptly, prevents the recovery of fear. This finding has important implications for theories of state discovery in reinforcement learning.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 241 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 1%
Sweden 2 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Unknown 231 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 54 22%
Researcher 48 20%
Student > Bachelor 31 13%
Student > Master 24 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 8%
Other 33 14%
Unknown 31 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 84 35%
Neuroscience 57 24%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 28 12%
Computer Science 7 3%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 2%
Other 13 5%
Unknown 47 20%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 7. 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 29 October 2020.
All research outputs
#4,536,923
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#739
of 3,153 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,030
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience
#38
of 165 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 80th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,153 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its peers.
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 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 165 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.