Abstract
Individuals who score high in intolerance of uncertainty (IU) display reduced threat extinction. Recently, it was shown that replacing threat associations with novel associations during extinction learning (i.e., presenting a novel tone 100% of the time) can promote threat extinction retention in individuals with high IU. This novelty facilitated extinction (NFE) effect could be driven by the tone's novelty or reliability. Here, we sought to address this question by adjusting the reliability of the novel tone (i.e., the reinforcement rate) during NFE. We measured skin conductance response during an associative learning task in which participants (n=92) were assigned to one of three experimental groups: standard extinction, NFE 100% reinforcement, or NFE 50% reinforcement. For standard extinction, compared to NFE 100% and 50% reinforcement groups, we observed a trend for greater recovery of the conditioned response during extinction retention. Individuals with high IU relative to low IU in the standard extinction group demonstrated a larger recovery of the conditioned response during extinction retention. These findings tentatively suggest that NFE effects are driven by the novelty rather than the reliability of the new stimulus. The implications of these findings for translational and clinical research in anxiety disorder pathology are discussed.
Highlights
The ability to discriminate between threat and safety is essential for survival
The correlation for the spontaneous recovery index and intolerance of uncertainty (IU) in the EXT group was significantly different than the novelty facilitated extinction (NFE) 50% [z = −2.45, p = .014] and 100% [z = −1.99, p = .046] groups
We examined the effect of standard extinction learning and NFE reinforcement rate (100%, 50%) upon extinction retention broadly and in relation to individual differences in IU and State-Trait Inventory for Cognitive and Somatic Anxiety (STICSA)
Summary
The ability to discriminate between threat and safety is essential for survival. Learning to associate potentially dangerous cues with threat can protect us from harmful situations. When a cue ceases to predict threat, it is adaptive to update this association from threat to safety. This process is known as threat extinction (Milad & Quirk, 2012). Omission of an aversive event results in a reduction of defensive behaviours, such as sympathetic arousal and freezing. This reduction in responsivity to the learned threat cue over time is believed to reflect changes in contingency beliefs and harm expectancy (Hofmann, 2008). Uncertainty about changes in contingency from threat to safety might prolong, or prevent, the learning of new safety associations (Bouton, 2002)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
