@article{AndreattaPauli2015,
  author    = {Andreatta, Marta and Pauli, Paul},
  title     = {Appetitive vs. aversive conditioning in humans},
  series = {Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience},
  volume    = {9},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience},
  number    = {128},
  doi       = {10.3389/fnbeh.2015.00128},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-148614},
  year      = {2015},
  abstract  = {In classical conditioning, an initially neutral stimulus (conditioned stimulus, CS) becomes associated with a biologically salient event (unconditioned stimulus, US), which might be pain (aversive conditioning) or food (appetitive conditioning). After a few associations, the CS is able to initiate either defensive or consummatory responses, respectively. Contrary to aversive conditioning, appetitive conditioning is rarely investigated in humans, although its importance for normal and pathological behaviors (e.g., obesity, addiction) is undeniable. The present study intents to translate animal findings on appetitive conditioning to humans using food as an US. Thirty-three participants were investigated between 8 and 10 am without breakfast in order to assure that they felt hungry. During two acquisition phases, one geometrical shape (avCS+) predicted an aversive US (painful electric shock), another shape (appCS+) predicted an appetitive US (chocolate or salty pretzel according to the participants' preference), and a third shape (CS) predicted neither US. In a extinction phase, these three shapes plus a novel shape (NEW) were presented again without US delivery. Valence and arousal ratings as well as startle and skin conductance (SCR) responses were collected as learning indices. We found successful aversive and appetitive conditioning. On the one hand, the avCS+ was rated as more negative and more arousing than the CS and induced startle potentiation and enhanced SCR. On the other hand, the appCS+ was rated more positive than the CS and induced startle attenuation and larger SCR. In summary, we successfully confirmed animal findings in (hungry) humans by demonstrating appetitive learning and normal aversive learning.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{HerzogAndreattaSchneideretal.2021,
  author    = {Herzog, Katharina and Andreatta, Marta and Schneider, Kristina and Schiele, Miriam A. and Domschke, Katharina and Romanos, Marcel and Deckert, J{\"u}rgen and Pauli, Paul},
  title     = {Reducing Generalization of Conditioned Fear: Beneficial Impact of Fear Relevance and Feedback in Discrimination Training},
  series = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  volume    = {12},
  journal   = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  issn      = {1664-1078},
  doi       = {10.3389/fpsyg.2021.665711},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-239970},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Anxiety patients over-generalize fear, possibly because of an incapacity to discriminate threat and safety signals. Discrimination trainings are promising approaches for reducing such fear over-generalization. Here we investigated the efficacy of a fear-relevant vs. a fear-irrelevant discrimination training on fear generalization and whether the effects are increased with feedback during training. Eighty participants underwent two fear acquisition blocks, during which one face (conditioned stimulus, CS+), but not another face (CS-), was associated with a female scream (unconditioned stimulus, US). During two generalization blocks, both CSs plus four morphs (generalization stimuli, GS1-GS4) were presented. Between these generalization blocks, half of the participants underwent a fear-relevant discrimination training (discrimination between CS+ and the other faces) with or without feedback and the other half a fear-irrelevant discrimination training (discrimination between the width of lines) with or without feedback. US expectancy, arousal, valence ratings, and skin conductance responses (SCR) indicated successful fear acquisition. Importantly, fear-relevant vs. fear-irrelevant discrimination trainings and feedback vs. no feedback reduced generalization as reflected in US expectancy ratings independently from one another. No effects of training condition were found for arousal and valence ratings or SCR. In summary, this is a first indication that fear-relevant discrimination training and feedback can improve the discrimination between threat and safety signals in healthy individuals, at least for learning-related evaluations, but not evaluations of valence or (physiological) arousal.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{StegmannAndreattaPaulietal.2021,
  author    = {Stegmann, Yannik and Andreatta, Marta and Pauli, Paul and Wieser, Matthias J.},
  title     = {Associative learning shapes visual discrimination in a web-based classical conditioning task},
  series = {Scientific Reports},
  volume    = {11},
  journal   = {Scientific Reports},
  number    = {1},
  doi       = {10.1038/s41598-021-95200-6},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-260480},
  year      = {2021},
  abstract  = {Threat detection plays a vital role in adapting behavior to changing environments. A fundamental function to improve threat detection is learning to differentiate between stimuli predicting danger and safety. Accordingly, aversive learning should lead to enhanced sensory discrimination of danger and safety cues. However, studies investigating the psychophysics of visual and auditory perception after aversive learning show divergent findings, and both enhanced and impaired discrimination after aversive learning have been reported. Therefore, the aim of this web-based study is to examine the impact of aversive learning on a continuous measure of visual discrimination. To this end, 205 participants underwent a differential fear conditioning paradigm before and after completing a visual discrimination task using differently oriented grating stimuli. Participants saw either unpleasant or neutral pictures as unconditioned stimuli (US). Results demonstrated sharpened visual discrimination for the US-associated stimulus (CS+), but not for the unpaired conditioned stimuli (CS-). Importantly, this finding was irrespective of the US's valence. These findings suggest that associative learning results in increased stimulus salience, which facilitates perceptual discrimination in order to prioritize attentional deployment.},
  language  = {en}
}