Conditioned physiological reactivity and PTSD symptoms across the menstrual cycle: Anxiety sensitivity as a moderator.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is often associated with heightened physiological reactivity during fear conditioning procedures, but results vary across studies. This study examined whether anxiety sensitivity (AS), or the fear of arousal-related sensations, strengthens the relationship between PTSD symptoms and skin conductance responses (SCR) during fear conditioning and extinction. Because gonadal hormones implicated in fear learning fluctuate across the menstrual cycle, the stability of these relationships in women was examined in 2 distinct menstrual cycle phases. METHOD: Thirty-two trauma-exposed women, half of whom had PTSD, completed the Clinician-Administered PTSD Scale, Anxiety Sensitivity Inventory, and a fear conditioning and extinction paradigm during the midluteal (mLP) and early-follicular (eFP) menstrual cycle phases. RESULTS: In the mLP, stronger SCR to stimuli paired with shock (CS +) during fear acquisition significantly predicted greater PTSD symptoms only when AS was high and after removing an outlier. This appeared driven by effects on Numbing and Hyperarousal symptom clusters. Other hypothesized interactions between AS and CS responses were not significant. However, in the eFP, differential SCR between the CS + and CS- during extinction predicted significantly greater PTSD symptoms, and there was a trend for this effect being stronger as AS increased. CONCLUSIONS: Results offer preliminary evidence that high AS contributes to a stronger relationship between SCR during fear acquisition and PTSD symptoms, at least among women in the mLP. Further research investigating the impact of individual differences in traits such as AS on the relationship between conditioned fear responses and PTSD symptoms is warranted. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".