Exploration of stress reactivity and fear conditioning on intrusive memory frequency in a conditioned-intrusion paradigm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The conditioned-intrusion paradigm was designed to provide insight into the relationship between fear conditioning and intrusive memory formation, which is relevant to understanding posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms and treatment. However, boundary conditions of this new paradigm have not been explored and it is currently not known whether findings from this work are valid in a clinical context. METHODS: In the current study, we explored the relationship between stress reactivity to trauma film clips, usual exposure to violent media, renewal of fear conditioning using skin conductance as well as subjective ratings, and the effect of shock versus film clip during conditioning on the frequency of intrusive memories. An adapted fear conditioning paradigm using trauma clips as unconditional stimuli was used, and participants subsequently reported intrusive memories of the trauma clips. RESULTS: Skin conductance responses to conditioned stimuli paired with shocks and film clips were significantly higher than conditioned stimuli paired with film clips alone. Subjective stress reactivity, previous exposure to violent media, and film valence rating were associated with the frequency of intrusive memories. No aspects of fear conditioning were associated with intrusive memories, and factor analysis suggested the fear conditioning and stress related to film clip viewing were mostly separate constructs. Similarly, content and triggers of intrusive memories were usually film-clip related rather than conditional stimulus related. LIMITATIONS: We did not observe strong conditioning effects of the unconditional stimuli to conditional stimuli, which were shapes rather than high frequency stimuli such as faces. CONCLUSIONS: These findings provide potential boundary conditions for this paradigm and suggest multiple ways in which the validity of the paradigm can be tested in the future.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".