English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Measuring the conditioned response: A comparison of pupillometry, skin conductance, and startle electromyography

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons202349

Leuchs,  Laura
Dept. Translational Research in Psychiatry, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons202344

Schneider,  Max
Dept. Translational Research in Psychiatry, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Max Planck Society;

/persons/resource/persons80538

Spoormaker,  Victor I.
Dept. Translational Research in Psychiatry, Max Planck Institute of Psychiatry, Max Planck Society;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)
There are no public fulltexts stored in PuRe
Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Leuchs, L., Schneider, M., & Spoormaker, V. I. (2019). Measuring the conditioned response: A comparison of pupillometry, skin conductance, and startle electromyography. PSYCHOPHYSIOLOGY, 56(1): e13283. doi:10.1111/psyp.13283.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/21.11116/0000-0009-732D-4
Abstract
In human fear conditioning studies, different physiological readouts can be used to track conditioned responding during fear learning. Commonly employed readouts such as skin conductance responses (SCR) or startle responses have in recent years been complemented by pupillary readouts, but to date it is unknown how pupillary readouts relate to other measures of the conditioned response. To examine differences and communalities among pupil responses, SCR, and startle responses, we simultaneously recorded pupil diameter, skin conductance, and startle electromyography in 47 healthy subjects during fear acquisition, extinction, and a recall test on 2 consecutive days. The different measures correlated only weakly, displaying most prominent differences in their response patterns during fear acquisition. Whereas SCR and startle responses habituated, pupillary measures did not. Instead, they increased in response to fear conditioned stimuli and most closely followed ratings of unconditioned stimulus (US) expectancy. Moreover, we observed that startle-induced pupil responses showed stimulus discrimination during fear acquisition, suggesting a fear potentiation of the auditory pupil reflex. We conclude that different physiological outcome measures of the conditioned response inform about different cognitive-affective processes during fear learning, with pupil responses being least affected by physiological habituation and most closely following US expectancy.