Citation

van Dis EAM, Hagenaars MA, Bockting CLH, Engelhard IM. Behav. Res. Ther. 2019; 120: e103416.

Affiliation

Utrecht University, Department of Clinical Psychology, the Netherlands.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.brat.2019.103416

PMID

31254717

Abstract

Exposure-based treatment for anxiety disorders is effective for many patients, but relapse is not uncommon. One predictor of the return of fear is the negative valence of fear-relevant stimuli. The aim of the current experiments was to examine whether counterconditioning with positive film clips reduces this negative stimulus valence as well as the return of fear, compared to standard extinction training and to an extinction training with non-contingent exposure to the positive film clips. Participants were 87 students in Experiment 1 (three-day paradigm), and 90 students in Experiment 2 (one-day paradigm). They first underwent a differential acquisition phase, in which one of three pictures was paired with an electric shock. They were then randomly allocated to one of the three intervention groups. Afterwards, they underwent a test phase in which pictures were presented without shock (to measure spontaneous recovery of fear), which was followed by unsignaled shocks to induce reinstatement of extinguished fear. Outcome variables were self-reported stimulus valence, shock expectancy, skin conductance, and fear-potentiated startle. In both experiments, counterconditioning decreased negative stimulus valence, relative to the other interventions, but it did not reduce spontaneous fear recovery or fear reinstatement. Overall, our findings do not support the notion that counterconditioning reduces return of fear.

Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Language: en

Keywords

Counterconditioning; Evaluative conditioning; Fear extinction; Positive valence training; Return of fear