Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36944865›Full record

ReviewCognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience2023

Weaker situations: Uncertainty reveals individual differences in learning: Implications for PTSD.

M Todd Allen

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

M Todd AllenSchool of Psychological Sciences, University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO, USA. michael.allen@unco.edu.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Few individuals who experience trauma develop posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Therefore, the identification of individual differences that signal increased risk for PTSD is important. Lissek et al. (2006) proposed using a weak rather than a strong situation to identify individual differences. A weak situation involves less-salient cues as well as some degree of uncertainty, which reveal individual differences. A strong situation involves salient cues with little uncertainty, which produce consistently strong responses. Results from fear conditioning studies that support this hypothesis are discussed briefly. This review focuses on recent findings from three learning tasks: classical eyeblink conditioning, avoidance learning, and a computer-based task. These tasks are interpreted as weaker learning situations in that they involve some degree of uncertainty. Individual differences in learning based on behavioral inhibition, which is a risk factor for PTSD, are explored. Specifically, behaviorally inhibited individuals and rodents (i.e., Wistar Kyoto rats), as well as individuals expressing PTSD symptoms, exhibit enhanced eyeblink conditioning. Behaviorally inhibited rodents also demonstrate enhanced avoidance responding (i.e., lever pressing). Both enhanced eyeblink conditioning and avoidance are most evident with schedules of partial reinforcement. Behaviorally inhibited individuals also performed better on reward and punishment trials than noninhibited controls in a probabilistic category learning task. Overall, the use of weaker situations with uncertain relationships may be more ecologically valid than learning tasks in which the aversive event occurs on every trial and may provide more sensitivity for identifying individual differences in learning for those at risk for, or expressing, PTSD symptoms.

Indexed as

Stress Disorders, Post-TraumaticAvoidance LearningExtinction, PsychologicalHumansIndividualityUncertaintyAnimal modelsAnxietyPersonalityPTSDUncertaintyWeak situation

Identifiers

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.