Evaluating an internet-delivered fear conditioning and extinction protocol using response times and affective ratings.

Pavlovian fear conditioning is widely used to study mechanisms of fear learning, but high-throughput studies are hampered by the labor-intensive nature of examining participants in the lab. To circumvent this bottle-neck, fear conditioning tasks have been developed for remote delivery. Previous studies have examined remotely delivered fear conditioning protocols using expectancy ratings and affective ratings. Here we replicate and extend these findings using an internet-delivered version of the Screaming Lady paradigm, evaluating the effects on negative affective ratings and response time to an auditory probe during stimulus presentations. In a sample of 80 adults, we observed clear evidence of both fear acquisition and extinction using affective ratings. Response times were faster when probed early, but not later, during presentation of stimuli paired with an aversive scream. The response time findings are at odds with previous lab-based studies showing slower responses to threat-predicting cues. The findings underscore the feasibility of employing remotely delivered fear conditioning paradigms with affective ratings as outcome, and highlights the need for further research examining optimal parameters for concurrent response time measures or alternate modes of non-verbal estimation of conditioned responses in Pavlovian conditioning protocols.

Does Probe RT Measure Central Processing Demand?

Various authors have tried to assess the processing demands of a range of tasks by presenting a probe at different times during their performance. The assumption behind the technique is that the more processing capacity the main task requires the less will be left for processing the probe. Hence, it is claimed, the reaction time to the probe can be used to infer the capacity demands of the main task. An experiment is reported in which two groups of women combine manual responses to a visual Same/Different letter-match task with responding to an auditory probe. The only difference between the groups is that one responds manually to the probe and the other responds vocally. The two groups produce an entirely different pattern of interaction between the two tasks. Were there an absolute central demand of the letter-match task which could be measured by the probe technique this should appear irrespective of the form of the probe task. Since the pattern of probe RTs does depend on the form of the response to the probe it is concluded that it is not possible to use a single form of probe task as a neutral measure of the central capacity demand of the main task.