↓ Skip to main content

Interoceptive fear learning to mild breathlessness as a laboratory model for unexpected panic attacks

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 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
Interoceptive fear learning to mild breathlessness as a laboratory model for unexpected panic attacks
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, August 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01150
Pubmed ID
Authors

Meike Pappens, Evelien Vandenbossche, Omer Van den Bergh, Ilse Van Diest

Abstract

Fear learning is thought to play an important role in panic disorder. Benign interoceptive sensations can become predictors (conditioned stimuli - CSs) of massive fear when experienced in the context of an initial panic attack (unconditioned stimulus - US). The mere encounter of these CSs on a later moment can induce anxiety and fear, and precipitate a new panic attack. It has been suggested that fear learning to interoceptive cues would result in unpredictable panic. The present study aimed to investigate whether fear learning to an interoceptive CS is possible without declarative knowledge of the CS-US contingency. The CS consisted of mild breathlessness (or: dyspnea), the US was a suffocation experience. During acquisition, the experimental group received six presentations of mild breathlessness immediately followed by suffocation; for the control group both experiences were always separated by an intertrial interval. In the subsequent extinction phase, participants received six unreinforced presentations of the CS. Expectancy of the US was rated continuously and startle eyeblink electromyographic, skin conductance, and respiration were measured. Declarative knowledge of the CS-US relationship was also assessed with a post-experimental questionnaire. At the end of acquisition, both groups displayed the same levels of US expectancy and skin conductance in response to the CS, but the experimental group showed a fear potentiated startle eyeblink and a different respiratory response to the CS compared to the control group. Further analyses on a subgroup of CS-US unaware participants confirmed the presence of startle eyeblink conditioning in the experimental group but not in the control group. Our findings suggest that interoceptive fear learning is not dependent on declarative knowledge of the CS-US relationship. The present interoceptive fear conditioning paradigm may serve as an ecologically valid laboratory model for unexpected panic attacks.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 10 22%
Student > Master 9 20%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 11%
Researcher 3 7%
Professor > Associate Professor 3 7%
Other 6 13%
Unknown 9 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 22 49%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 13%
Neuroscience 2 4%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 1 2%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 12 27%
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 06 August 2015.
All research outputs
#17,768,879
of 22,821,814 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,444
of 29,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#177,583
of 264,036 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#423
of 547 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,821,814 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 29,769 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 264,036 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 547 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.